The Thief of Bagdad 1940; Ahmad and Aladdin shop at the same store

by
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’ 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 an 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 entertaining movie that while doesn’t have the most development characters and the plot is all over the place is fun to watch and enjoyable.

2022 Edit- I recently rewatched this movie. I maintain that it’s fun entertaining movie with a lot of great spectacle. I think some of the aspects that might have bothered me when I wrote this review, like the Princess’ journey being off-screen don’t bother me. The story wasn’t about that we just needed to know that she tried and we can use how imaginations. I do wish she had a name but the movie is more about Abu helping with buddy out. Also it’s not a character driven  narrative and that is fine. It’s not a fault it’s more of a feature.

Clue 1 and Clue 2

La Belle et la Bete 2014 Review; Who Wants a love story when we got Backstory and an Epic Fight Scene!

by
La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

La Belle et la Bete

I don’t want to blame The Lord of the Rings for ruining fairy-tale movies but I think Lord of the Rings is ruining fairy-tale movies as they now have to be EPIC! Case in point, this movie. The 2014 version of La Belle et la Bete seems to be a remake of the 1946 movie, which I have gone on record as saying I love, however this 2014 French movie is not a remake, it’s a more of a weird re-imagining that seems to be telling a Beauty and the Beast tale but it doesn’t really want to.

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Léa Seydoux as Belle La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Lèa Seydoux as Belle

Before I tell you the plot here is a game to keep in mind, try and pinpoint the exact moment when this story decides it would rather be a totally different movie, it’s not hard.

It starts off pretty much same as the 1946 version except this version is told as a story to children, gee movie I wonder who could be telling this tale and who these kids are, it’s not obvious at all. Belle’s family is being forced to move to the country as they’re poor now. Belle is the youngest child and her mother died giving birth to her. In the country, Belle is enjoying the new life but when her father hears the one of his boats survived the storm that sunk the other two ships. Her father asks what she wants back from his trip and she says a rose.

The father doesn’t get his shipment of goods and is instead  attacked by some thugs who his son owes money to or something (Just get used to these thugs guys, they are the villains). Belle’s father escapes but gets lost and lands in an enchanted domain complete with enchanted castle. In the castle he is given a lots of gifts for his family but  when he takes a rose, the Beast tells him to go home and say good-bye to him family and then to come back to die and if he doesn’t come back the beast will kill the whole family. Belle feels responsible and goes to the beast to die in her father’s place.

The Beast gives her lots of gifts and free roam of the castle which is enchanted with these weird dog-like creatures that are like servants. The Beast tells Belle that her curfew is seven o’clock and he asks if she is in love with him, which she is not.

Belle is then sent weird dreams about a Prince and his wife. The Prince likes to hunt and that makes his wife uneasy. The wife asks the prince to stop hunting deer, a golden deer specifically and he agrees if she gives him an heir. Belle gets more of these dreams throughout the movie.

Belle and the Beast have somewhat an uneasy relationship but Belle tries to get a visit to her family but the Beast doesn’t want to let her go. Belle offers a dance in exchange for a visit, so they dance but the Beast doesn’t give Belle her wish so she bails. The Beast chases after her and pounces on her on some ice and she crashes down through. He brings her back to the castle and heals her with some magic water. When she comes to he agrees to left her visit for family for a day and if she doesn’t return he will die. Before though he gives her some magic water in necklace form.

Belle returns and her brothers and they  see her riches and bargains with the thugs for whatever treasure for the family’s safety. Belle heals her father with the magic water. Belle gets a final dream (she had like two of these prior.) In one dream prior we learn that the Prince’s wife was pregnant. In the final dream the Prince is hunting and finds the golden deer and shots it. The Golden Deer turns out to be his wife who was nymph of the forest. In a rage for killing his daughter the God of the Forest turns him into a beast and you know how this works, only love can break the curse.

We then get a fight with the thugs. Belle races to help and begs the Beast not to kill the lead thug guy but he mortally wounds the Beast with the golden arrow that he killed his wife with (there was a statue that you see a few times). As the Beast is dying, there are like giants that come out and thorns and they like kill all the bad thugs. Belle and her brothers get the Beast to the magical water and presto he’s fine. Belle ends her tales and the kids go to sleep but OMFG, the kids are her and beast’s children this whole time and they live in the house in the country with Belle’s dad, WHA? I’m SO SHOCKED! No, not really.

Léa Seydoux as Belle La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

Lèa Seydoux as Belle

Despite my plot summery, which I will admit I don’t have a super grand recollection of this movie, that final confrontation lasts a while and REALLY doesn’t make any sense but a lot about this movie doesn’t make much sense.

Ok, let’s just start with the positives, that is typically a good place to start usually, in most cases.

The movie on a whole looked good. The costumes are the de-facto high point. They are pretty and somewhat imaginative. I like her red coral and her white gowns the best. The setting was pretty. They made the castle overrun with flowers which made it more enchanting. However the CGS, oh god the CGIs were awful. Sorry, I know I was going with positives and I go right to a bad point but you have to understand they were bad. The Beast looked really bad.

I guess another good point was the acting, it didn’t suck that much. I mean it could have been bad though the character had little personality so there wasn’t that much to ask for so it’s a moot point.

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Léa Seydoux as Belle La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Lèa Seydoux as Belle

So now we come to it, the movie and the story. Apparently this movie actually had good reviews that said it kept ” the original spirit of the story.” No, no it didn’t. This movie was like watching a director trying to mimic Peter Jackson and Tim Burton making a Beauty and the Beast movie sans the point of the story. Even the score sounded like a Danny Elfman knock-off which wasn’t that bad but it was super apparent.

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Léa Seydoux as Belle La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Lèa Seydoux as Belle

This movie’s main issue is that it wants to be BIG and EPIC, there is an epic fight with giants and magic and it wants to have a interesting backstory for the Beast and you know what, that is fine, that’s a great idea BUT that epicness come at the expense of BEAUTY AND THE GODAMN BEAST! I do not buy for one instant that these two fell in love. I don’t see it. There isn’t one scene that indicates a love story. There was a scene where they were marginally nice to each other but is that love? Apparently is it because next time they see each other they are in love and voila spell is broken.

I’ll get more to the spell in a second because I have problems with that as well as the backstory. But because this movie wanted to have like a mysterious backstory it takes away interactions with the the two leads and as a result I have no clue for the characters. They didn’t develop or fall in love with each other and that is the spirit of the original story, love and it’s not even remotely present in this movie.

Vincent Cassel as the Beast in Human form La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

Vincent Cassel as the Beast in Human form

So because this movie made a decision to have an intricate backstory, how is it? Well It’s like we’re in a whole different movie and it kind begs the question why bother?

Maybe I’m wrong but I thought the POINT of the Beast is that because he was beast he lacked the capacity to relate to people on an intimate level BUT here he was MARRIED? Am I supposed to believe that he didn’t know how to deal with a woman?

So unlike other Beasts that are either jerks or walking a thin line between animal and humanity, this beast is a jerk to Belle because he killed his wife accidentally? You know he wasn’t acting like he did, In fact with the whole backstory I thought that the beast was the Prince’s son the whole time because the Beast was acting like an immature brat the whole movie and not like a suave guy who is mourning his beloved wife. I mean the twist was good but MY GOODNESS it was stupid. And why would the Forest God turn him into a Beast to find love when it was in payment for killing his daughter? That makes zero sense as a revenge punishment. Why give him an out that leads to happiness? At least other spells were trying to teach him a lesson, I don’t see the point of this one at all.

And why did the God turn him into a Beast and then seem to help him in fight at the end? Why? It didn’t make sense, was it because of the nymph’s love? I know she was the one sending Belle the dreams but why? See doesn’t see like the backstory and the fight belong in a different movie!

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Léa Seydoux as Belle La Belle et la Bete 2014 picture image

Vincent Cassel as the Beast and Lèa Seydoux as Belle

I will give 2014 La Belle et la Bete a little credit, it gave the story atmosphere and pretty costumes but what it gave it more than lacked; it lacked sense, characters, and the romance of beauty and the beast.

Time for Clues;
Clue 1 & Clue 2

Thoughts from 2022 – Wow was I mean in this review. I mean, yeah, the CGI were not that great and there was a muddling in the backstory but it wasn’t as bad I recalled or this review made it seem.

I was watching it because I working more costume pages on Hubpages, and the costumes in this movie are gorgeous and a rewatch was in order. Rewatching this movie I think I developed a theory as to why the romance was sparse but also why it was epic, magical and lyrical. It goes back to the framing device, a children story, perhaps Belle embellished the tale to make her meeting her husband into more of a fairy take for her children. The doll that the tadums (the dogs) gave her pointed that this story being true but maybe she just added it story for the children’s benefit. Or maybe not but the whole narrative as children story makes the films decisions feel more intentional AND having a child like sensibility is asked of the viewer at the start of the 1946 version so it’s not too much of a stretch. Anyway it’s not a bad movie, it’s fine.

Enchanted Review: Shame on you if you missed all the Disney in-jokes

by

Enchanted picture image

Enchanted

The first time I ever saw the 2007 movie Enchanted, I was on a plane going from Quebec City to Montreal. I’m not sure why they offered in-flight entertainment for a thirty minute flight but I watched like ten or so minutes and I enjoyed it enough to rent it when I got home, ahh the days of rental places. Enchanted is an entertaining enough movie yes but does its message of real life vs fantasy get muddle in Disney-ideals and its own tropes? Let’s find out but the answer is yes.

Amy Adams as Giselle with Patrick Dempsey as Robert Enchanted picture image

Amy Adams as Giselle with Patrick Dempsey as Robert

Fair Maiden Giselle, one day meets Prince Edward and they promptly decide to get married the next day, why rush a good thing, right? However Edward’s stepmother Queen Narissa doesn’t want Edward to get married as it would diminish her power so on the wedding dat Narissa pushes Giselle down a fountian waterfall spring thing to a place where happy ever after don’t exist, Manhattan, and not like third world country no, fucking Time Square is where happy ever after don’t exist, like that’s the joke?

Anyway Giselle has a rude awaking but meets Robert and Morgan, father and daughter. Robert doesn’t want Morgan to idealize Princesses and Morgan does. Robert feels this way because Morgan’s mom left for reason. They take Giselle back to their apartment which causes a little fiction with Robert’s girlfriend Nancy. Giselle uses her fairy-Princess super powers to help people with love but Robert teaches Giselle about dating and forming attachments through getting to know a person.

While that is happing Narissa’s henchman, Nathaniel is trying to kill Giselle by poison apple method, Giselle’s chipmunk pal, Pip is trying to help Giselle not to die and Edward is searching for Giselle. Then when Nathaniel fails and Edward finds Giselle, Narissa comes into the fray as she had been previously communicating with Nathaniel through water.

So they all go to a ball where Giselle dons a modern gown. Giselle and Robert dance but then Narissa has Giselle eat a poison apple, Edward’s kiss fails to break the spell but Robert’s does and Nancy and Edward are okay with that. Narissa however turns into a dragon to kill everyone and drags Robert and Giselle up to the roof where Giselle slays her pretty darn easily. So Nancy and Edward go back to the fairy-tale world and get married, Nathaniel and Pip write tell-all-books and Giselle starts a fashion-line because she was good at sewing and I guess her and Robert get married maybe and she become a nice stepmother. Subversive!

Okay before I get into this movie I HAVE to say, with a Queen Stepmother trying to gain control by killing her step-son’s love (who happens to be dealing with a world that is not her own) to maintain her power and she uses water magic, this reminds of a a manga I like, it was almost distracting.

Amy Adams as Giselle Enchanted picture image

Amy Adams as Giselle

Enchanted does some nice things with subverting the Disney tropes however it undermines itself too. First off, yes, Giselle doesn’t just marry her “true love” she gets to know him and the true love thing is grown and somewhat cultivated in a way. Giselle is given more self-awareness however I doubt that Giselle would ever have a problem with Edward as the fairy-tale world or Andalasia as in it’s very existent is being ignorant of problems unless you’re a bad guy. So Giselle is the positive but as other side of that coin is Nancy.

Nancy Tremaine (voice by Idina Menzel) and Prince Edward (voiced by James Marsden) getting married in Andalasia Enchanted picture image

Nancy Tremaine (voice by Idina Menzel) and Prince Edward (voiced by James Marsden) getting married in Andalasia

Nancy just throws a whole wretch into what the movie was trying to say, life isn’t like a fairy-tale except if you drop everything in your life and run off with a guy you haven’t know for a day and marry him. Seriously, Nancy and Edward get married at the end? Why? Because the screenwriters wanted them to have a happy ending after being dumped? Are we REALLY to believe a woman, who seems like she has a pretty good life would run off with some guy she JUST met and exchange maybe like handful of sentence? Sure, we didn’t REALLY get to know Nancy all that well but she didn’t seem the type who would abandon everything for some guy who spoke somewhat romantically and she REALLY didn’t seem too broken up about Robert leaving her away.

The screenwriters kinda wrote themselves into a corner because either Nancy had to be the fairy-tale princess and leave her world behind or Edward would have needed to stay in New York City which means, Edward would have needed an arc which he did not get. If the movie wasn’t so entertaining this would be a bigger issue since the movie wanted to parody this kind of thing and work against it but it’s ok for side characters to marry people they don’t know, just not the main characters.

Amy Adams as Giselle with James Marsden as Prince Edward and with Patrick Dempsey as Robert and Rachel Covey as Morgan Enchanted picture image

Amy Adams as Giselle with James Marsden as Prince Edward and with Patrick Dempsey as Robert and Rachel Covey as Morgan

Aside form that the movie is really well done. The acting is really good and everyone seems like they are having fun with their roles. I do think Susan Sarandon as Narissa is miscast but she is not that bad. I really enjoy James Marsden as Edward but I’m an unabashed 30 Rock fan so anything that reminds me of that is a-ok. And Amy Adams lives the role of Giselle, she was pretty perfect.

Amy Adams as Giselle performing That's How you Know Enchanted picture image

Amy Adams as Giselle performing That’s How you Know

The technicals in this movie were fun too. The animation is fluid and clean and it wasn’t done by Disney how is that for the ultimate irony. The live-action parts are nicely shot and have a fun and playfulness.

I have to love the costumes except for one, the one that disappointed me down to my very soul, that Tahari gown Giselle wore at the ball. I don’t know why films do this, but if there is a costume ball the main characters will ignore it and wear a regular dress. They did it in the 2004 Phantom of Opera and I will NEVER forgive them. I mean the dress is pretty, it is just number one, it’s too simple for the venue, if they had a more Oscar style evening gown, something with a wow-factor I could see it. And number two this dress is like going from zero to 360 for Giselle. I guess the point of Giselle’s costumes is that they get more modern the longer she is in the real work but come on movie, that Tahari gown was in no way the next step for her fashion evolution. I say no. Otherwise the costumes were great.

The musical numbers are a lot of fun. The big number, “That’s how you know” is bright and colorful and big. It reminds me of the pretty women number in Kal ho naa ho which is fun number.

I think the only number that wasn’t that great was the Ballroom dance, though maybe I just don’t like that scene, that darn dress and the final fight meh. Also why didn’t Narissa get a a villain songs, seriously we get three freaking songs about love and romance but no Villain songs. (is it just me or did Giselle understand dating more than Robert with all the things she listed in That’s How you know?)

Susan Sarandon as Queen Narissa Enchanted picture image

Susan Sarandon as Queen Narissa

Okay, speaking of Narissa, what was her plan and how did the whole power thing work? First off, problem one, her motivation was to keep the prince single so she could remain queen? So why didn’t she just kill the prince instead of going after his bride? It’s just a stall. Then her motivation changes to just being evil because even though at that point it was established that Giselle wasn’t into Edward, so why did she bother and she was one weak fucking dragon. I would THINK it would take more than a sword wound to prevent her from flying and I dunno, burning people? I think they were referencing Sleeping Beauty but they fairies gave the prince buffs to his sword or whatever.

Second, how does succession work in Andalasia? Does the Queen maintain her power after the king is dead? But then why is Edward a prince and Narissa a queen? Shouldn’t Edward be King? Do you have to be married in Andalasia to get a King/Queen title? Is Edward’s father still alive? Why don’t Disney villain ever just try to manipulate the royals instead of being the ruler? Like Narissa could have wrapped Giselle around her figure and been a shadow ruler. What kind of power did Narissa hold anyway? Did she share it with Edward? Or what she acting regent till he married? Then why didn’t she kill him and pull a coup? How does is work??? It’s not important to the story but it’s the villain’s motivation, I dunno maybe a song could have cleared it up, or she could have been a better evil villain to make me forget this kind of stuff, she is as menacing as tin foil. Also her costume looked more sci-fi than fantasy, more leading a legion of spiders than queen of place called Andalasia.

Amy Adams as Giselle with Pip Enchanted picture image

Amy Adams as Giselle with Pip

Despite its flaws, and boy does it have them, Enchanted is a fun and entertaining movie that does a nice job of parodying and paying homage to Disney tropes all while totally buying into them.

Time for Clues, Clue 1 & Clue 2

One of those clues makes me laugh, try and guess which one and the next movie.

La Belle et La Bete 1946 Review; No Subtile Necessary, this movie is perfect!

by

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.

The Thief of Bagdad Review; That Lizard Dragon thing was awesome, wish it was main character.

by

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 Princes’ 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 part 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. 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.

Maleficent Review; I think it was all the exposition that put Aurora to sleep

by

Maleficent picture image

Maleficent

As some people might have guess from my clues, this week we’re looking at the 2014 movie, Maleficent. This movie is a re-imagining of the 1959 Disney version of Sleeping Beauty but from villain Maleficent’s perspective, hence the name. While on paper that does not seem like a bad idea, the execution of this movie is so fucking naive that it’s bad. It’s like they took the stupidest idea possible for what to do with Maleficent’s character and combined with more successful movies, like Frozen, Avatar and Lord of the Rings to name the obvious ones.

Also, all I will say on the narration is that it was over-done and bogged the movie down. It was the first red-flag of crappiness.

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent with Elle Fanning as Aurora picture image

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent with Elle Fanning as Aurora

Basically, Maleficent is a fairy with bird wings and horns and she lives in the Moors and fucking shot me already. The Moors are clearly just a name but they don’t look anything like Moorlands of England. They could have called the mythical utopian fairy land ANYTHING else and it wouldn’t been an issue but now I have to think about how stupid this name is every time it appears on screen. Since the Moors are a discount failed Pandora from Avatar why not just called them something Greek or something, ANYTHING would have been better. Was that your first idea screenwriter? Really, off an a tangent already, great start.

So the “Moors” which is a land of fairies and Tree-ants a la Lord of the Rings and/or Groot are at odd with the Humans. Maleficent is a some kind of super fairy and she befriends and falls in love with a human named Stefan. The king gets his beard in a twist because Maleficent kicked with army’s butt with her tree-ants, so he offers the hand of his daughter to the person that can slay Maleficent. Stefan drugs her and steals her wings and gets to be the king while Maleficent’s heart turns cold or something and gets a crow minion.

Stefan has a baby girl and Maleficent curses her and this scene is ALMOST verbatim to the original expect Maleficent puts the clauses in about True Love’s kiss awaking her as a slap-in-the-face to Stefan who claimed he had given Maleficent a true love’s kiss. Also the green fairy who was the blue fairy didn’t get to give Aurora a gift, though the gifts in this version are stupid. Also Maleficent says it’s a sleep like death when in the original Maleficent just said she will die, so…… anyway.

Stefan must be smoking copious crack because he entrusts the stupid fairies with raising the princess (I think there was line about the fairies being good with human but WTF why?). The fairies are so stupid that Aurora would have staved to death and fallen off a cliff if not for Maleficent who helps care for the child on the sly and pranks the fairies for jollies. Aurora gets in to her head that Maleficent is her fairy godmother, oh dear god movie, I can’t, I don’t even know but wrong movie there. Maleficent then tries to revoke the curse but can’t because of her wording about nothing be able to break the curse.

Aurora meets Prince Mcgaffin erm I mean Phillip and they have a little attraction which crow-boy hopes means is true love. Aurora for some reason (I wasn’t paying a lot of attention at this point), goes back to the castle a day before she was suppose to and falls in to the  death-like sleep coma-nap. Maleficent bring Prince-i-boy to help with that pesky curse but he fails, (fail sound effect from the Price is Right), so Maleficent kisses her on the forehead and in Frozen fashion Aurora wakes up and then there is a dumb fight, Maleficent turns her pretty-boy crow into a dragon, pffffffttttttttttttttttttt and stupid happy ending and it turns out all that annoying narration was done by Aurora. Hate this movie.

Isobelle Molloy as Young Maleficent with Michael Higgins as Young Stefan picture image

Isobelle Molloy as Young Maleficent with Michael Higgins as Young Stefan

On the one small hand, I sort of appreciate what Maleficent was trying to do in theory but on the other larger hand this movie missed the point of everything and meanders into the realm of idiocity.

The first major problem is Maleficent herself. Maleficent in no way shape or form should be the same entity as the Good fairies and for the record why did they change their names from Flora, Fauna and Merriweather to Flittle, Knotgrass and Thistlewit? Really, I could do another full post on these useless pixels but I will refrain*.

To have Maleficent as good fairy at the start with a name like Maleficent which means evil is dumber than naming a character Knotgrass or Flittle or Thistlewit. They could have made Maleficent change her name to suit her evil persona but nope a child fairy who ages for no reason that the film gives is given the name which means Evil. I mean for Fuck sake movie, you give the origins of her staff but no mechanic for how or why she grows-up when nothing else in her realm does? F-U!

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent after her wings have been cut off picture image

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent after her wings have been cut off

Another issue is that original movie called Maleficent the mistress of evil. Given this, she didn’t NEED reason to be evil, she just was and rather enjoyed it. Actually she did have a reason for why she cursed Aurora, she got snub an invitation to a baby shower, I would have done the same thing.

But you what REALLY pisses me the fuck off about all this movie? SO the film takes the stance that true love between two platonic ladies exists and is a strong bond a la Frozen which is great HOWEVER this lead you down the path that the film as feminist bent BUT Maleficent’s anger and hatred comes from a guy betraying her. She is literally a scorned woman, a man made her become evil. Why can’t she just be evil? Why can’t she just have been demonic entity whose got a sense of humanity from a pure girl, kind of a Sleeping beauty meets Hades/Persephone dynamic. This movie spouts the power of women but evil unintelligible king caused the Maleficent to be evil.

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent picture image

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent

And that is another problem, Maleficent’s evilness is VERY infantile. Literally all she does besides the plot-curse is prank the fairies with rain magic and turns the Moors gloomy. If that is extent of her evil that means the curse on Aurora or the plot is very out-of-character for Maleficent. It’s like the movie took this awesome kick-ass bad guy but was afraid to make her evil because if she is evil than the audience wouldn’t like her but that was the point. Sleeping Beauty from the perspective of the Mistress of Evil and they sap all of her likable-evil and just watered her down to the point of delusions.

Elle Fanning as Aurora Maleficent picture image

Elle Fanning as Aurora

Then we have Sleeping Beauty herself. One BIG criticism of the original is that Aurora gets very little screen-time and this movie was chance to give her more of a character but nope fuck that. One of the fairies, and who fucking cares which one it was, gave her the gift of being happy. This makes Aurora a smiling simpleton with no other sense of character. Really all she is happy, I think the original Aurora had more of a range of emotions and that is so sad.

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent flying picture image

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent flying

But you know most modern movies have shit for characters because they more are all about being Bigger, Louder and having more teeth i.e technicals and CGs and you may ask how are they in Maleficent? OH dear god, do they suck, they suck much my friends. It’s like everything looked so fake and cheesy that it hurt, like I’m in pain just thinking about it.

But the REAL tragedy is that costumes which I need to distract me from a movie’s stupidity were not there, Maleficent’s costume were meh. Really, don’t recall anything, maybe Aurora wore blue and Maleficent had horn wraps.

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent with Baby Aurora picture image

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent with Baby Aurora

Maleficent could have been an interesting movie if the screenwriter had just kept certain things in play like Maleficent’s character and TURINING IN A FUCKING DRAGON! Really that they turned the Mistress of Evil into a Mischievous Nanny is insulting. I bet a re-imagining of Mary Poppins would have a more Maleficent like character than this movie. And WHO the FUCK gave the Money to get this shit storm a sequel? Know that I hate you whatever orderd a sequel.

* leave a comment if you want me to bash the fairy and maybe the other characters.

The Wedding Planner Review; Yeah, that M&M line was the stupidest thing

by

The Wedding Planner picture image

The Wedding Planner

FINALLY a wedding movie that doesn’t take plan in New York City. I didn’t really mention that but all the other took place in NYC and nothing is wrong with that it’s just variety is the spice of life. The 2001 movie, The Wedding Planner took place in San Francisco like some other wonder movies such as The Room. But does the different setting mean The Wedding Planner is a good, no that is silly however as it stand the movie is meh to ok at best at worst it’s meh to dull and VERY predictable.

Steve (Matthew McConaughey) saving Mary (Jennifer Lopez) The Wedding Planner picture image

Steve (Matthew McConaughey) saving Mary (Jennifer Lopez)

The movie follows Mary (Jennifer Lopez), a wedding planner who is trying to land a big account at her wedding planning firm. One day after she lands said big account she meets a handsome doctor, Steve (Matthew McConaughey) and they share a romantic moment and surprise, surprise he’s the groom. As this is going on Mary is being pursued by this childhood friend of her’s the her father wants her to marry. As is standard with wedding movie the Steve doesn’t get married on his wedding day though his fiancee is okay-ish with it since she was second guess the marriage too. Mary is going to marry the Italian guy but doesn’t and in a nice twist the movie makes you think Steve is going to break up the wedding but he doesn’t but other wise it standard wedding movie fair.

Also Judy “You’re NOT my Supervisor” Greer is in this movie, though she is nice in this movie which is just weird.

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) comforting a bride The Wedding Planner picture image

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) comforting a bride

One thing that is good about this movie is AT least Mary’s obsession with wedding is channeled into her being a wedding planner unlike in 27 dresses and Bride Wars where the characters are just obsessed with them.

Steve (Matthew McConaughey) and Mary's childhood friend, Maximo (Justin Chambers) The Wedding Planner picture image

Steve (Matthew McConaughey) and Mary’s childhood friend, Maximo (Justin Chambers)

But you know what is interesting especially when compared to the other movies it how the relationship go and who the main characters picks. In this movie Mary has two choices for guys the one she JUST met, Steve the Doctor and the one she has the shared history with, her childhood friend Maximo. In the end she goes with Steve over Maximo. This is kinda similar with 27 Dresses where Jane has the choice between her boss whom she has known for years and a guy she just met, though the one she just meets in the movie shows more interest.

Bride Wars is very different in the Emma knew both guys for a long period of time but since the audience doesn’t know her with Liv’s brother we the audience have to assume that they don’t really know each other that well over her and Fletcher who had been living together and know each for a decade.
Then we have Made of Honor, which had more of Bro tone which made it a hybrid-chick flick. This film makes it very clear that Hannah didn’t know Colin at all despite that they spent a month together going to museums and traveling which you would make you think they talked but the film defames the whole love at first sight which The Wedding Planner glorifies.

Also I have give props to the jilted couples in these movie, they take it all like pros especially in this movie where we have not one but two and they just handle it really well, like unnaturally well.

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) and Steve (Steve (Matthew McConaughey) doing a snarky tango The Wedding Planner picture image

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) and Steve (Steve (Matthew McConaughey) doing a snarky tango

So what about our couple, Mary and Steve? Well to put it nicely, they have all the on-screen chemistry of a refrigerator and sunblock. Seriously, oil and water have better chemistry than these two. I didn’t believe them at all, I mean they have the classic attractive people who smile at each and/or have snarky banter, clearly they must be in love.

Steve (Matthew McConaughey) with Fran ( Bridgette Wilson-Sampras) The Wedding Planner picture image

Steve (Matthew McConaughey) with Fran (Bridgette Wilson-Sampras)

But you know this a wedding movie damn it, only one thing matters, the wedding gown and in this movie we get two. Three if you REALLY want to count the lady at beginning but I won’t. Fran’s dress is REALLY standard, it’s pretty but it very conventional, the veil is pretty. I wish the band a under the bust wasn’t beige. Apparently it had more details than I’m letting on, as it had lace, sequins and button but I didn’t perceive in the movie it just wasted details. And once agian it’s a Vera Wang, I don’t hate Wang’s design but really why are these gown so like text book bridal?

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) in her wedding gown The Wedding Planner picture image

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) in her wedding gown

Mary’s city hall affair dress is the foil Fran’ s dress. It’s a sixty style short dress with off-shoulder and a pillbox veil hat and 3/4 sleeves with buttons. It’s a sweet dress and it seems like contextually it was Mary’s mother so while it didn’t suit Mary’s style it work within the movie. It’s not really my cup of tea but it’s fine. I guess I could as that from Fran’s too.

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) and Fran ( Bridgette Wilson-Sampras) The Wedding Planner picture image

Mary (Jennifer Lopez) and Fran ( Bridgette Wilson-Sampras)

As far as movies go The Wedding Planner is very predicable fair even for wedding movie standard. It has it’s entertaining moments but the predictability and lack of chemistry makes it a dull this to watch.

It also has some VERY stupid shit in it, like the statue’s ball, that brown M&Ms are better for you than the other colors, and that Mary would risk her life for Gucci shoes. And Justin Chambers’s fake accent is cringe-worthy.

Also that the fact Mary was jilted before her wedding was REALLY shoehorned in for like no real and yet she is STILL a wedding planner. Her being a bit of a control freak goes hand-in-hand with her wedding planning and why she doesn’t have her own love life, it wasn’t needed and didn’t go anywhere.

Bride Wars Review; If your wedding isn’t in June at the Plaza you might as well just not get married

by

Bride Wars picture image

Bride Wars

At last, we come to the low hanging fruit. This movie hangs so low of that it’s on the ground, really this movie doesn’t seem like a challenge to review. I’m talking about the 2009 travesty known as Bride Wars. Really, this movie is so bad that Nostradamus himself predicated its coming. Ok no, that is giving this movie too much credit nor is it the worse movie in the world, it only has a 10% on Rotten Tomatoes when Happily N’ever after has a 4% and Alone in the Dark has 1%, so where not in that area of totally ass-ness but we venture close, very close.

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) at the wedding planners Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) at the wedding planners

The movie is about childhood friends Liv and Emma. Both have a happy memory about having tea at the plaza in June and seeing a wedding, they both decide at the tender age of “young girl” that they both want to have June weddings at the Plaza. So they both Live in New York City and Liv (Kate Hudson) is a perfectionist control-freak lawyer who somehow lost her parents or something, the movie doesn’t really fleshed that out and Emma (Anne Hathaway) is a people-pleaser middle school teacher.

Both have serious boyfriends and both become engaged at the same time. Both go to the same wedding planner and they are told there are three spots at the Plaza in June, two on the sixth and one 27th. So Liv takes the 6th and Emma 27th but OH the plot, there was a mix-up and they are both on the same day Nooooooooooooo! So because they don’t really want to ruin their ideal wedding dreams, they start attacking each other in girly-bitch methods like getting one fat, rumors, embarrassment, messing with tanning and hair dye and full-on wedding fight. They pretty much reconcile when Emma, who had been having friction with her fiancee decides on their wedding day to call it off. SO Liv gets married and Emma doesn’t but at the end she marries Liv’s brother and they find out they are both pregnant a year later, hello sequel that never happen.

Liv (Kate Hudson) with blue hair Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) with blue hair

Ok. number ONE, the plot of competing best friends could have and should been handled before they were even told. Second, it was a breech of contact and they had the right to sue. Third, why the fuck didn’t the other bride just switch? She would have been operating under the assumption her wedding was the 6th and not the 27th. The plot just rest on something that is stupid and fixable but the movie wants to spend more time on women acting like selfish bitches.

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) catching a bouquet Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) catching a bouquet

The movie also tries to justify Liv and Emma acting like children. First they both have this idea that any wedding that isn’t at the Plaza in June is beneath them but they wrap this up in Liv and Emma having reasons for their attachment. Liv’s excuse is that the Plaza was the happiest memory from her childhood, and yes that is a better reason than Emma’s who has just been saving up for it though she makes less money than Liv the Lawyer. But also Emma is a people-pleaser who can’t really say no, so she wants something for her.

So they both think they are justified BUT they both could have had it they had taken better action in the first place. And REALLY is June  important? I can understand the location but the month? Some months aren’t good but they made it seem like June was the end all be all and not the person they were marrying.

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway)

Briefly let’s just talk about the guys, Liv’s boyfriend just gives in to her and pretty just chill, I forgot his name. Emma’s guy, Fletcher is overbearing and just wants Emma to be a sweet little person with no emotions or that is how the movie wants us to view him because we can’t feel sad when him and Emma break up to allow for Liv’s wedding. Also Emma ends up with Liv’s bother of whom gets like two scenes with Emma and exhibits no personality, so match made in heaven I guess.

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Liv's groom cutting their "Trendy fusion" cake Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Liv’s groom cutting their “Trendy fusion” cake

Now we talk about the weddings. The most ironic thing about this movie is that wedding that is not in June and not at the Plaza is better looking than Emma’s and Liv’s dream elitist weddings. Granted, we didn’t see that wedding only the reception. I forget what their themes were but Emma was something like minimal romantic and Liv’s was trendy fusion but the two decors didn’t match. Emma’s was like black with roses and not like fun Victorian gothic a la Phantom of the Opera but like just ugly and dour. Liv’s was just like gold tones, which I think looked prettier but it wasn’t trendy fusion and futhermore WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? Romantic minimal yeah I get that but Trendy Fusion? Fusion with what? Do you have  like mason jars with like Indian wedding details mixed with Cherry Blossoms? I’m so confused. Everything about Liv’s wedding SCREAMS traditional and not at all trendy or Fusion.

Their wedding looked like boring and they played $350 plus taxes per person for that venue. Gah

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) in their wedding gowns Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) in their wedding gowns

Then we have the gowns. Both were designed by Vera Wang. Ok, first this movie makes the claim that Vera Wang gowns are so wonderful, that you don’t alter the gown you alter yourself to fit the gown. First this was supposed to be for giggles and a Liv’s gained 5 pound pay-off but so the fuck-of-sake that is the just elisted bullshit that Vera Wang herself said was dumb, and this shit was giving her free advertisement that she does not need. So it sucks for short girls, who have better figure out how to grow seven inches so they can fit into a designer gown, may be you could stench yourself. Or painful heels.

But the gown themselves, Liv’s tulle ballgown was overrated. It’s pretty standard as wedding dresses go. I mean there is nothing really to it other than sheer volume. Emma’s wedding gown is much better BUT in the context of the story it was her mother’s wedding gown which means now I have to do MATH, I so hate this movie. So let’s just say Emma is roughly late twenty to early thirties and for this let’s just say she is 28 given the college being ten years ago lines, This would mean that she was born roughly early 80’s about 1981 or 1982. This means her parents could have been married anywhere from 80 to sometime in the 70s and let me just say, NO WEDDING GOWN FROM THAT TIME LOOKED LIKE EMMA’S MOM’S WEDDING GOWN! Just google pictures.  I can’t like Emma’s gown on a contextual level and I don’t like Liv’s gown on a personal level.

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) after bride bitch fight Bride Wars picture image

Liv (Kate Hudson) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) after bride bitch fight

Bride Wars sucks as it just elitist bullshit about two horrible women doing terrible things to their best friend because f-you my wedding day.

(2022 edit- title has been changed. Also toned the angry language)

27 Dresses Review; Sheesh Lady, you’re vindictive

by

27 Dresses picture image

27 Dresses

Most wedding movies are notorious for being bad even if they are just sort okay-ish and/or dull and cliche. 27 Dresses, released in 2008, is one such movie. It’s far from worse movie ever made but it is so steeped in cliched cliches that is just so dull.

Katherine Heigl as Jane as Southern Belle Bridesmaid 27 Dresses picture image

Katherine Heigl as Jane as Southern Belle Bridesmaid

The story follows Jane (Katherine Heigl), a people pleaser who just wants to help every one and loves wedding. Like she is obsessed with weddings and she is madly in love with her boss, George (Edward Burns). She hopes that if she has no life of her own George will notice her or something. Senpai will not notice you!

Jane’s younger sister Tess (Malin Ã…kerman), comes into town and falls for George and he’s interested in her. In classic middle school fashion, Tess then lies to George to seem like she has things in common with him, like that she is a vegetarian who like outdoor activities and likes dogs. While Jane watches Tess steal George, a mean attractive writer is stalking Jane. This writer named Kevin (James Marsden), writes wedding related articles but he wants to prove his worth and writes a piece of Jane who has been a bridesmaid 27 times and he hates the wedding industrial complex while Jane loves it, so friction and snarky romance ahoy.

So Jane plans Tess’s s wedding, which she wants to be just like their dear departed mother’s wedding which was Jane’s dream. Jane then learns about the article after she sleeps with Kevin, they had been getting less snarky by that point, and she gets mad at him. Then Tess cut up their mother’s wedding gown to suit her style which causes Jane to go over the edge. Jane then humiliates Tess at the rehearsal dinner with a slideshow which reveals her lies and the wedding is off because you DON’T LIE ABOUT PUPPIES!

Then stuff gets resolved, Jane and Tess make up, Jane quits her job and Kevin and her get married and all the brides she was a bridesmaid for are at her wedding, in the dresses that they put Jane in which I think is bitchy and vindictive but I think the movie thought it was sweet gesture or something, I dunno.

Judy Greer 27 Dresses picture image

Judy Greer in 27 Dresses

As you can see this movie it cliched as fuck, it does nothing really that new. It just takes that old saying, “Always A bridesmaid never a bride,” and made it into a movie because getting married and having a wedding is the fucking end all be all, am I right? At least this how the lesser wedding movies operate.

However there was one thing I did like about this movie and it’s what got me through all the trite over-played dullness, this movie reminded me of shows I like. Judy Greer played Jane’s rude best friend, Casey and she was in Arrested Development and is in Archer. James Marsden and Maulik Pancholy, who played Kevin’s co-worker, were both on 30 Rock. And Of Course, this movie was referenced in an episode of Bob’s Burger called Gene It On. Otherwise this movie is as interesting as diluted cheap Vanilla Ice Cream.

Katherine Heigl as Jane with Malin Ã…kerman as Tess and Edward Burns as George 27 Dresses picture image

Katherine Heigl as Jane with Malin Ã…kerman as Tess and Edward Burns as George

But you know just because a movie is cliched and dull doesn’t mean there can’t be good characters. Oh, wait no, I’m wrong, interesting characters would negate the dullness. No, the Only thing that is remotely interesting, beside Judy Greer, are the ugly bridesmaid dresses. The rest of the characters are dull, predicable and stupid. Jane is a push over who likes wedding, Tess is egoistical, Kevin is snarky and George is ummm I have no idea, he didn’t have much of personality except nice. At least Casey’s rudeness was something but she was a minor-character so the movie didn’t to try to make the audience like her so  she was just Judy “you’re not my supervisor, say good-bye to these” Greer.

Katherine Heigl as jane in ugly purple dress with James Marsden as Kevin 27 Dresses picture image

Katherine Heigl as jane in ugly purple dress with James Marsden as Kevin

So let’s talk about the wedding in this movie, well counting Jane’s at the end there are three and one planned. The first one is standard, the second is was a Hindu-Jewish wedding and third was goth or heavy metal thing. So two out of three had personality though really movie, spike dog-collar for the bridesmaid.

The only thing we see from Tess’s wedding is her Amsale gown which was actually supposed to her mother’s gown cut up which causes Jane to loose her shit. Tess apparently took the mom’s gown because she was trying to be like Jane and part of that was stealing Jane’s dream of having their mom’s wedding. It was just so fucking contrived. The dress was alright, though I don’t think that style is still in but it was bitch move.

Jane and Kevin’s wedding was on a beach. I wish there was something in their characters that made this venue make sense. Like what about them says a beach? They didn’t seem like outside people. One line about them liking beaches could have help. It just seemed like a catalogue stylish thing for the movie to do.

The former Brides in the bridesmaid gown they picked as Jane's wedding 27 Dresses picture image

The former Brides in the bridesmaid gown they picked as Jane’s wedding

It’s just a little more than sad that the dresses of 27 Dresses are more memorable than any of the characters.

Made of Honor Review; It’s all about Cake and Hair in the end

by

For this  merry theme month of weddings and stuff it’s only appropriate to look at wedding movies and because it’s more fun and entertaining to attack low hanging fruit, I have picked four bad wedding movies.

Made of Honor picture image

Made of Honor

So let’s start with the craptasic Made of Honor. Get it, it’s a pun even though the guy in question isn’t remotely honorable but who cares. It was released in 2008 by people who clearly wanted quick buck and trip to Scotland, hey there are worst reasons to make a stupid wedding movie.

Hannah showing off her Fiancee, Colin to Tom Made of Honor picture image

Hannah showing off her Fiancee, Colin to Tom

The story follows this guy named Tom (Patrick Dempsey) who likes to sleep around with lots of dumb ladies and has a lot rules so that he doesn’t have to get attach. However he has this girl-pal named Hannah (Michelle Monaghan) who fulfills the girlfriend role without all the pesky intimacy parts, like going to his father’s sixth wedding.

So one day Hannah goes to Scotland on business. While she is gone, Tom decides that because the ladies he is sleeping with don’t want to do the stuff he does with Hannah he wants to be with Hannah but curve ball Hannah returns from Scotland with a fiancee and she asks Tom to be her Maid of Honor, see, see the English based pun the movie made, oh dear me it’s so fucking clever. And because he is the maid of honor people assume he’s gay, I don’t really know why they would think that but fuck that, it’s cheap running gag.

Tom decides to destroy the wedding from within by trying to convince Hannah, her fiancee, Colin, (Kevin McKidd) is not good enough for her or she doesn’t know him very well. Colin turns out to be a rich Whiskey marker who is Duke who is also well-endowed and is also really cool with Tom and Hannah’s close friendship. Tom also has to face off against Hannah’s cousin, Melissa who hates him for breaking her heart but more for the fact that she wanted to be the maid of honor.

Anyway they go to Scotland, Hannah becomes less smitten with Colin because he plays the bagpipes, hunts deer to provide a free-range meal and wouldn’t left her take cake off his plate, what a dick, am I right? So Tom and Hannah then have a dumb misunderstanding for drama and shit and then blah blah, he leaves but comes back and stops the wedding and Tom and Hannah get married.

Hannah Michelle Monaghan and Tom Patrick Dempsey Made of Honor picture image

Hannah and Tom

The first thing to know about this movie, is that  pretty much all of the characters are selfish assholes. There is nothing likable about any of them but the movie operates on the assumption that they are and that you should care about Tom stealing someone else’s bride away even though Hannah and Tom are conditioned for each. Noticed, how I said conditioned, they have been friends for ten years and they are just used to each others habits and that is the basis for their romance. I don’t care if they are attracted to each other basically if a lady didn’t want to do the stuff Hannah did with Tom, Tom dismissed her. He didn’t even try to find things to do with the other women, it had to be on his terms as the things he did with Hannah. And Hannah is no better. She gets all shocked that Colin wouldn’t let steal his piece of cake the way Tom does. I mean he gave her a piece of cake but still, god forbid people don’t conform to the way you like things done.

Hannah Michelle Monaghan and Tom Patrick Dempsey Made of Honor picture image

Hannah and Tom

Another thing the movie does is tries to give a little moral about honesty. Typically in wedding movies the weddings are just a vehicle for some character to get over some personality trait or tell their best friend that they love them. This film does both. The first the thing is the Hannah and Tom are friends but they became friends when Hannah honestly insulted Tom and he got some kind of sexual thrill from it or something. Tom has some issue with intimacy that stem from his father’s lack of commitment, this is also why he can only tell random dogs he meets that he loves them. So he digs honesty with Hannah. However Hannah then tells him that sometimes it’s okay to lie to let someone be happy which is what Tom does with Hannah’s wedding. He also isn’t serious or something. So Tom has to prove he is serious and be honest with Hannah that her wedding sucks.

Hannah and Tom with Colin Patrick Dempsey, Michelle Monaghan, and Kevin McKidd Made of Honor picture image

Hannah and Tom with Colin

Speaking of Hannah’s wedding, she technically gets two. The first one is her Scottish fairy tale wedding complete with ugly hair and a stupid sash. Now I will give that, yes her hair looked dumb but really the whole honesty plot came to Tom telling Hannah that wedding hair style looked bad because the bridesmaids couldn’t, is everyone in this movie stupid?

As for the Sash, they claimed it was traditional, though they didn’t say how or why but Hannah’s dress was boring without it so whatever. Could Hannah just not say no to anything? Oh and her other wedding to Tom was just averagely stylish, like a catalogue, fancy but lacking any heart or unique qualities.

Tom in a mini-kilt Made of Honor picture image

Tom in a mini-kilt

Then there was Scotland. The ONE thing the movie does well is that the shots of Scotland are beautiful, like stunning, though you have to get through an hour of jerky people being bitches to get there and then the shots are few and you have to deal the movie’s offensive take of the Scottish people, so yeah Scotland’s beauty couldn’t save this ass of movie. Just pardon this picture, the games part was just a clunker of a scene.

Hannah Michelle Monaghan and Tom Patrick Dempsey Made of Honor picture image

Hannah and Tom

Made Of Honor is crappy movie full of crappy selfish assholes who think love means that the person will let you get steamed Dim Sum but really this movie thinks its being smart, sincere and funny and it’s just not any of those things. The best parts were the random dogs. And by the by here are things the movie made me question instead being invested in the plot or the characters,

-did that Starbuck lady actually make the coffee that way with no foam decaf with 70% filled caramel or what ever?

-What did Hannah do at the MET? She looked like she was conservation but she went on an acquisition’s trip. At a smaller museum I could see this happening but at the fucking MET? No.

-So fried food is worse than causal sex, according to Tom?

-Who the hell transports a horse fully saddled? I mean Wha?

If you want a better movie about a guy trying to steal a bride away, watch Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge .