I can't believe they stretched this storyline into an eight episode series. This should've been 4 hours at the very maximum ( and I'm being generous here). For eight hours we should've got more side plots about the other characters And what did we get? Bogus scenes every episode with Olaf getting drunk in the pub, nauseating scenes with Martha and Franklin canoodling in his car. Jeepers creepers I was watching this thinking "Can FDR just kick it so we can get to the end of this ".
Ok this movie sucks for various reasons already mentioned by other reviewers, but my biggest complaint is what they did with the Lisa McDowell character. In the original movie she was bright, intelligent, lovely, and upbeat. Of course Akeem fell for her and you got the feeling she was going to breath new life into Zamunda as his wife, i.e. no more of that rose petal crap etc..
But instead, in this movie Lisa does nothing but roam around the palace wearing her tiara 24/7 and looking down at everyone with a perpetual frown and haughty attitude. The fact that she only shows any happiness is when she gets plastered with the Leslie Jones character is pretty pathetic. This is the Lisa who made that speech about the children being the future causing Akeem to fall for her? The character has been turned into a complete mindless doormat.
The Best Version was the 1980 version however this one was nice
All the reviewers are going on about the 1995 version but I thought it was terrible. If you want a true interpretation of Pride and Prejudice check out the 1980 version with Elizabeth Garvey and David Rintoul. That version has both humor and charm which I found lacking in the 1995 edition. Having said that, this film reminds me of the 1940 version in the sense that it's an adaptation for it time i.e. 21st century audience. Yes it's a looser interpretation of Austen but I still enjoyed it. But Mary Boland from the 1940 movie is my favorite version of the mother
Basically Three Coins in a Fountain filmed in Beautiful Mexico
Gave this a a 10 just because it was worth it to see how beautiful Mexico was. And let's face it, for Hollywood to film on location in Mexico the 50s is a rarity . The fact that Metro even bankrolled a movie set in Mexico is a wonder. Also this is probably the only film to my knowledge where Mexican actor Ricardo Montalban actually portrayed a Mexican instead of the what Hollywood considered the "acceptable" Latin lover, eg. an Argentinian polo player I.e. European.
Her portrayal of Judy Garland was a cartoonish attempt, like those lame Bette Davis impersonations. And who said Zellweger could sing? This movie was all hype; but once one sits down to watch there is nothing! So many times I kept thinking "This is not Judy Garland". Can't believe Zellweger won best actress for this ridiculous impersonation
It was difficult to watch this and see Fonda play such as jerk. Plus the plot was somewhat weak, Temple and Agar's was storyline was uninteresting to say the least and the usual antics of McLaglen were repetitive of so many of his movies. To be fair the Apache's were treated as victims of the white man, justified in their actions, and it was surprising to see Wayne as their advocate. However I did not like the ending, it came across as a cover up placing false glory on a treacherous act. But I guess that was Ford's message, the image of the military must be protected, and that did not sit well with me.
I'm a fan of all three of the actresses in this movie but I was hard pressed to keep watching this. There was no discernible plot that I could see except that each of these women was screwed up in her own way. I think whoever wrote the screenplay should've done a better job tying these characters and their issues together so it would come together. Mystic Pizza is a good example of bringing the story of three women together and coming up with a conclusion that makes for entertaining movie watching
Peter was quite good as Chips, and I can see the value of changing the time period, but they should have kept it a straight drama, The songs were so lame, unmemorable and quite dumb. I couldn't imagine any private boy's school having such a corny school song as was written for the fictional school. And because the songs were insipid, the movie dragged , especially towards the end. Also, one of the plot points in the original movie dealt with Chip's former student grown and now a soldier in WWI, coming to Chips for help. That would've been more interesting to see in a WWII setting than Petula Clark singing yet again another mediocre song.
Audrey Hepburn would've been a perfect cast as Mrs. Chips, sweet, lovely, and full of charm.
I gave this movie a high ranking for Jeffrey Hunter's rendition of Jesus. Contrary to what critics at the time said, I feel he gives a meaningful performance of Jesus. For me the the movie is flawed because of others have said the movie has too many sub plots going on, when the movies should be about Jesus. But I think Hunter got a bad rap from the critics; he was great
This would've been a fun movie to watch if it had been made in MGMs glory days: Joan Crawford as the up and coming buyer trying to prove herself, Clark Cable as the department store heir, William Powell as the newspaper reporter, and of course Franchot Tone as the designer, Fun to watch in the 30s, but boring and stodgy for the 60s. This type of comedy had seen its day. Also, as other reviewers have mentioned; the sets were recycled , and the lighting might've worked for black and white or technicolor, but by the 60s a more realistic approach is warranted, the sets just look like a cheap set for a TV sitcom. And why put Ann Margaret in an those clothes that were suitable for old ladies? This was the height of the youth culture of the 60s and she's dressed in clothes fit for an old MGM matron. Helen Rose was no Givenchy that's for sure.
Barbara Stanwyck and Errol Flynn are two of the most dynamic screen personalities of their time, so I had to watch this one. And I wasn't disappointed, I was glued to the screen to see if Flynn was really up to no good. I found their chemistry intriguing to say the least. My only complaint about the film was the ending was too rushed. But all in all, I found this to be quite entertaining
Sorry, but this was a total whitewash of what Germany allowed the Nazis to do. The scene where the Germans are protesting, WTH? They were silent while the Jews were being removed, but they have the courage to protest the British occupation? GMAFB. And
the British are portrayed as the ugly enemy, occupying the home of an honorable, innocent, wealthy German whose family no doubt made money from the war. Only in today's rise of white nationalism would this movie get made. Fortunately the ending was redeeming
Watching this movie I couldn't help but think it was pity that Warner Bros didn't put Flynn in more romantic comedies. He proves to be quite charming and witty. This film elicited quite a few chuckles from me, loved Flynn's impression of Lucile Watson, his attempts to one up he man Forest Tucker, as examples. I thought the script was pretty good and Eleanor Powell was great as Flynn's ex. Flynn's facial expressions, while not as obvious as Cary Grant's were pretty good. Errol Flynn is quite the charmer with that mischievous sparkle in his eye
Aside from the script being hopelessly outdated, Rex Harrison and Kay Kendall really got in my nerves with their constant blathering in their posh upper class accents- I could totally see Carol Burnett and Harvey Korman spoofing this movie with Roddy McDowell and Vicky Lawrence in support. Especially irritating was the date rapist twit, who also happens to be a captain of the guards?!!! Nice portrayal of HRH military, yuck!
While the premise of this show is good, the fact that you have to sit through 7 episodes to find out who committed the crime is exasperating to say the least. Shows like Endeavor and Poirot wrap up the crime in a single episode and they do it well. But 7 episodes??? Come on!!!
Would've rated it 10 if La Virgin de Guadalupe had been included
Great movie but how can you have a story about Mexico's spirituality without including La Virgin? To me that was a MAJOR omission. Come on, the movie has flying spirit creatures? But no angels? No saints? Being Catholic in Mexico has both cultural and religious significance. To have a film about the afterlife in Mexico with no mention of Dios is not an accurate portrayal.
But given Hollywood's overall treatment of Latinos , hey this is a step forward.
I thought the Winona Ryder version was too modern in its interpretation, but this latest version is absolutely horrible. Where to start? First, the setting; it's pretty obvious it was filmed in Ireland. It's constantly raining and overcast and looks like it was filmed on the moors instead of beautiful green New England. Yes the sun does shine gloriously when winter is over. Next, this version has the worst Amy of all time. Amy has always been the most unpleasant character in all versions but she is a downright horrid selfish creature who seems to be eyeing Laurie from the start. Beth and Jo: there is no semblance of the special closeness which existed between these two. And Jo? I know Jo was never concerned with fashion, but I doubt she'd run around wearing a poke bonnet from the 1840s. I could go on and on. The only bright spot is Angela Lansbury's Aunt March. I was so looking forward to seeing this Masterpiece version, but it is the biggest disappointment of the season.
It's 2005 -Can't Hollywood cast indigenous people yet?
Once again Hollywood has ignored the indigenous people of Mexico. By casting a Spaniard in the role of Flor, the makers of this movie have once again shown their ignorance of Mexican culture. The Anglos probably figure "Spanish, Mexican, whatever...". I'm sorry but the maids, gardeners and nannies I see in the wealthy neighborhoods of Southern California are not European Spaniards, but are indigenous or mestizo people who have not stepped out of some airbrushed magazine with European features. I find it hard to believe that in 2005, Hollywood still ignores us. It's as bad as the 30s and 40s when they cast Jeanne Craine as Pinky or J. Carroll Naish as the Cisco Kid.