|
|
|
Évaluation du client type
Partagez votre opinion avec les autres clients
|
|
|
› Voir les points de vue les plus utiles
|
|
"Featurette" not worth it, Janv. 10 2003
This review pertains to this DVD, and not the movie itself. I LOVE this movie, and already have a copy on DVD. When I saw that it was being re-released with a featurette, I was anxious to buy it for the extra footage. The "featurette" is about 7 minutes long and is just a glorified trailer. It contains lots of movie clips and some interview material. The interview material focuses mostly on plot related topics and themes, and offers no insight into the making of the film or the beautiful location in Italy where it was shot. If you do not own this movie and are looking to buy it on DVD, I would recommend it. However, if you already own a copy of this movie on DVD and were thinking of buying this version for the featurette, don't waste your money.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
It Shouldn't Happen To A Dogberry, Oct. 3 2001
"Much Ado About Nothing," a bon bon of a play, one of Shakespeare's most breezily delightful comedies, is deceptively difficult to pull off, mainly because its success rests entirely upon the charm and vivacity of the performances. Kenneth Branagh's vanity production suffers from a plentiful lack of both, and the play comes to grief. There are few genuinely bad things about his movie, but the bad things are truly terrible.If the chubby little star/director's crude hamming (when was the last time a person actually expressed joy by splashing about in a fountain?) or the smirking-through-her-frowns mugging of his then-wife Emma Thompson are not enough to put you off, Michael Keaton's performance should do the trick. Playing the sublimely funny clown, Dogberry, Keaton is worse than a disaster: he's an atrocity. Dogberry is a scene-stealing actor's dream of a role: one that not only gets the biggest laughs in the show, but is generally considered to be actor-proof. Unhappily, it is not Keaton-proof. The chief pleasure of the role is the familiarity of his type: a well-meaning and diligent, but imbecilic and utterly incompetent petty official with delusions of grandeur. But Keaton misses the joke completely and plays him as a disgusting creep -- Beetlejuice on a bad acid trip. His swinish performance very nearly makes Branagh and Thompson seem acceptable by comparison. It is a noisily wrong-headed performance of such arbitrary and grotesque ugliness that whenever he is on screen, you may find yourself (as I did) using your hand as a blinker to prevent yourself from catching sight of his repellant image. You may also want to turn the sound off so you won't hear him murder the text with his willfully obscure, thuddingly unfunny line readings. Still, it can be said that Keaton's performance is something of a wonder, if judged purely as an abomination. It stands as the second worst performance ever committed to (or on) film. (For the record, the all-time, unapproachable worst is Howard da Silva's in "1776".) Happily, an antidote may be on the way: a famous 1970's Public Theater production of "Much Ado About Nothing" (which should be released in the near future) features the splendid Barnard Hughes as Dogberry, who plays the role with such pizzazz, and is so superbly funny, he will make you forget all about Keaton's criminally insane misinterpretation. He may even wash the septic taste out of your mouth. Patrick Doyle's score is pretty and pleasant, if too short.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 internautes sur 3 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
Non-Keanu actors dragged this one down, dude, Oct. 26 1999
Par Un client
Keanu Reeves shows once again that he is like so deserving of the Oscar that he almost won for Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. Unfortunately, this film is hampered by its constant use of big, hard-to-understand words, and by the lack of talent of Branagh, Thompson, and Washington. [It] would have been better if he had dressed up as some kind of caped crusader and fought crime. Although it must be said that of all of Branagh's stupid, mindless action flicks (Henry, Henry II, Henry III, Henry IV, Henry V, and Dead Again), this one is the best because of Keanu Reeves. Whoah!
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 internautes sur 7 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile :
yuck!, Mars 10 2004
I'm no fan of the original play and this film version is even worse. The film adds pointless scenes (nudity, along with others) not in Shakespeare's work and twists others; all aimed at an audience that doesn't care about solid acting--of which this film has none (spoiling the few interesting bits of the play)--to begin with and many of the actors simply shouldn't have even been considered-both Reeves (who can't act at all), and Keaton could never work out in a drama movie.
It should be said that nearly every big-screen Shakespeare translation (apart from Zeffirelli's version of Hamlet and Branagh's Henry V) have stunk. Parker's Othello is just as bad as this piece of trash to say nothing of Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet or Hoffman's A Midsummer Night's Dream. It's my suggestion, that if you really want to see Shakespeare off the stage, then look for BBC material.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ce produit
|
|
D'occasion et Neuf à partir de : CDN$ 31.77
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Les clients qui ont vu cet article ont aussi vu
|
|
Acheter neuf: CDN$ 15.98 CDN$ 10.99
À paraître - Commandez-le dès aujourd'hui!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Accueil Amazon
