Excuse me? Come again? Excuse me? Seriously? Was Mira Nair, the same Mira Nair that made the Monsoon Wedding really serious when she made... that?
I was high up in the sky after the success with The French Lieutenant's Woman so another film based on a book about British people running up and down in horses seemed just about right. That is, Vanity Fair, the 2003 version with Reese Witherspoon. So mistaken, I'm afraid!
Well, the point is that there is no point at all. The film has no structure, no smoothness, no anything. I haven't read the book, so maybe, when you compare the film to the book all of it makes sense. But I don't think so. I have the feeling that the characters are just placed in front of the camera so the actors can look pretty in period costumes. Otherwise, why is George Osbourne given so much importance? Why the long camera shots? Why the silence when he appears? I know that Jonathan Rhys Meyers is absoulutely beautiful, and Irish, to top things up but, is that enough reason to make everything stop when his character is around? Even if the character is not that important and all that jingling around just tricks the viewer? I read a review by a viewer that said that she was so happy with that film because she loves the Tudors and Rhys Meyers looks so hot in Vanity Fair. Is really what all this is about?
I kept watching the film until the end, thinking, oh sure, that the film was just going to improve now. Now is the moment. Wait, now. But no, it just kept as confusing and out of focus until the end. Right until the end, when these Britons went into an Indian village in an elephant and I saw the Monsoon Wedding again in front of me. Of course. The whole film wasn't about getting money with all the stars, or about the hot actors, or about the pretty dresses, or about Legally Blonde (oh, how I love Reese in Legally Blonde), it was about using an elephant again. What a fun time. The Indian landscape and the dancing natives from an elephant. Thank the construct we have an umbrella.
I was high up in the sky after the success with The French Lieutenant's Woman so another film based on a book about British people running up and down in horses seemed just about right. That is, Vanity Fair, the 2003 version with Reese Witherspoon. So mistaken, I'm afraid!
Well, the point is that there is no point at all. The film has no structure, no smoothness, no anything. I haven't read the book, so maybe, when you compare the film to the book all of it makes sense. But I don't think so. I have the feeling that the characters are just placed in front of the camera so the actors can look pretty in period costumes. Otherwise, why is George Osbourne given so much importance? Why the long camera shots? Why the silence when he appears? I know that Jonathan Rhys Meyers is absoulutely beautiful, and Irish, to top things up but, is that enough reason to make everything stop when his character is around? Even if the character is not that important and all that jingling around just tricks the viewer? I read a review by a viewer that said that she was so happy with that film because she loves the Tudors and Rhys Meyers looks so hot in Vanity Fair. Is really what all this is about?
I kept watching the film until the end, thinking, oh sure, that the film was just going to improve now. Now is the moment. Wait, now. But no, it just kept as confusing and out of focus until the end. Right until the end, when these Britons went into an Indian village in an elephant and I saw the Monsoon Wedding again in front of me. Of course. The whole film wasn't about getting money with all the stars, or about the hot actors, or about the pretty dresses, or about Legally Blonde (oh, how I love Reese in Legally Blonde), it was about using an elephant again. What a fun time. The Indian landscape and the dancing natives from an elephant. Thank the construct we have an umbrella.
Yes, I wasn't a huge fan of the film. Although, fun fact, Robert Pattinson plays her son in the film and now the two are co-starring in Water for Elephants as LOVERS. kind of icky to think about.
ResponderEliminarSo icky. This film is so incestuous.
ResponderEliminar