Category: Movies

  • Ebert

    That bug seems to be still firmly lodged up Ebert’s ass. This week he rips on John Cusack’s new film.

  • Firth problems

    Also note down at the bottom of that same IMDb news page, there’s a blurb entitled “Colin Firth Causes Problems For Bridget Jones Sequel.” And what is it about? “Bridget Jones author Helen Fielding has found a flaw in the adaptation of her sequel Bridget Jones: The Edge Of Reason — Colin Firth has to be in it twice.” DUH. I’ve been telling everybody I know this for weeks. I don’t really think it’s much of a problem though. The main reason is that the Colin Firth interview in the second book only makes sense when you know about Bridget’s obsession with Pride & Prejudice. Since they cut all of those references in the first film, there’s no reason why they have to include them in the second. Also, as I pointed out before, the second book is really sucky plot-wise anyway and the Colin Firth bit has nothing to do with the storyline, so Fielding might as well lift it out and rewrite the whole thing. And lastly, this stupid blurb makes it sound like Fielding really just forgot that Colin Firth was in the second book. Nobody is that stupid. I think she and the filmmakers made a conscious decision to use Firth in the first film knowing that they’d have problems with a sequel. In my opinion, he was perfect to play Mark Darcy and the value of his performance far outweighs a few missing P&P references. (At least, for most of the non-Austen-fanatic moviegoing public.)

  • High-concept

    You know, in my History of Film class in college, the professor defined a “high-concept” movie as one where the plot can be summed up in 20 words or less. Giving that definition, I wonder where “One Night at McCool’s” fits. Every advert I’ve seen for it only says one thing: “Liv Tyler washes a car.” I predict this film will bomb at the theaters yet do a reasonably good business on video, simply for the teenage-boy-wank factor.

  • Crocodile Dundee

    Roger Ebert says the new Crocodile Dundee movie isn’t great, but you could do worse. I also appreciated Ebert’s deft use of Australian expressions. (“Good on ya, mate!”) As a side note, why the heck is Ebert’s site so slow these days? Take my advice – if you actually get the main page to load, open all links in a new window. Otherwise you’ll never get back to the main page again.

  • Bridget Jones sequel

    I knew it would happen. The producers are apparently mulling over a Bridget Jones sequel. I can see A LOT of problems with this. A) The actual book’s sequel wasn’t very good, if you ask me. I liked reading more about Bridget, but the plot itself (which was apparently based on Austen’s “Persuasion,” I think) was a bit ridiculous and not at all funny. B) There wouldn’t be a role for Hugh Grant. Daniel isn’t in the book at all, and for them to write him in would require a major rewrite of the entire story. And besides, they already expanded his damn part for the first one. C) It’s not very romantic. It kills the “happily ever after” you get at the end of the first book/movie. It would be wrong. I’m sorry, Helen Fielding, but I think you should leave well enough alone.

    Edited 18/04/2025: Original link is dead and not archived.

  • Ebert reviews Bridget

    I knew Roger Ebert wouldn’t let me down. I knew it. His review of Bridget Jones is insightful and accurate and funny. He gets it. He liked it. He even made a subtle reference to “Pride and Prejudice.” And I’m pretty sure he calls Colin Firth “luscious” in there. That’s why Ebert’s my favorite.

  • Obi-wahoo

    Obi-wan was… bisexual? Huh. I’m envisioning all new scenarios for Episodes 2 & 3 to explain the “betrayal” between him and Anakin. Oh yes, Ewan McGregor. You know what I’m talkin’ about. Yeah, baby.

  • HP trailer

    Ooh! I didn’t realize that the Harry Potter trailer is in theaters already. I may have to go see Spy Kids to get a glimpse.

    Edited 17/04/2025: Link is dead and not archived.

  • Spitting mad

    I’m so mad I could spit. I thought that I wouldn’t find a dumber review of the film than that last one, and then I came across this. I’m so furious I can’t even begin to… Renee Zellweger weighs AT MOST 130 pounds in this film, and this woman has the NERVE to call her “an alcoholic chipmunk en route from the nougat farm”? Does “Carina Chocano” have any idea what the normal female looks like? We have breasts. We have asses. We look like Bridget. The whole point is that she’s normal but believes that she’s not. And it’s this kind of attitude, “Carina,” that fosters such f-ed up body images in young women. If no one had ever seen Renee Zellweger before this film, you wouldn’t have even thought twice about her weight. Beeatch.

  • Bad review

    Ugh! This reviewer of Bridget Jones’s Diary just didn’t get it. She makes it sound like the whole movie’s about sex. Sex and slutwear. And she liked Hugh Grant’s character. *shudder* Obviously this woman has some serious issues.