Bebe-Neuwirth Movie Reviews

I dunno. This movie made me think of something George Carlin said: "Wherever ideas are concerned, Americans can be counted on to do one of two things: Take a really good idea and run it completely into the ground, or take a really bad idea and run it completely into the ground."

Part of the appeal of the first movie was the dark theme, the lovable characters, and the bittersweet story. In other words, it was the kind of movie that, when you were done watching it, you didn't know how to feel about the ending. Mixed emotions.

Remember reading "Where the Red Fern Grows," and feeling that same way at the end? Part of the reason that book was so good is because it makes you feel that way.

I believe the people who wrote this sequel wanted to do two things: They wanted to make a quick buck, sure... but not only that, they wanted to continue the story with a script designed to negate those mixed emotions the first movie produced. They were soft and weak, and couldn't stomach a movie that didn't have a clear-cut happy ending. So they produced something inferior that completely destroyed the magic of the original story, all in an effort to set things straight.

I gave it two stars for it's good-hearted (yet lame) attempt to reach out to the children of divorced parents, but as far as I'm concerned, this sequel never happened.

What would we do without sequels? There are good sequels (3/10) and then there are bad sequels (7/10). So does All Dogs Go To Heaven 2 deserve a growl or a happy bark? Hmm...

The film itself gives the viewer nice looking animation, songs and introduces new characters. Okay so that's fine. The animation however is not as catchy (or dark) as it was in All Dogs Go To Heaven 1 and therefore the characters look a bit different. The first film had songs integrated in it and so does this one. Although in the original film had doggies singing the songs too I find the singing dogs in All Dogs Go To Heaven 2 to be a little corny. The songs are nice however. New characters are fine too and Charlie Sheen's voice fits Charlie okay.

Since I love the first film I also like this one very much. If you liked the first film then go ahead and get this one. All Dogs deserve a second chance you know =)

More than Fifty Years later... When a nasty bulldog named Scarface (Voiced by Ernest Borgnine, Replacing by Vic Tayback from the Original-Who Died in 1990) to Steal Gabriel`s Horn, which allows entry through Heaven`s gates. When the Horn falls into Earth. Charlie (Voiced by Charlie Sheen, Replacing Burt Reyonlds) and his best friend Itchy (Voiced by Dom DeLuise) are sent back to earth to get back Gabriel`s Horn to stop Scarface and Prevent the Evil Red from turning Alcatraz into a dark, eternal Dog Pound!

Directed by Larry Leker & Paul Sebella made an light, entertaining Sequel to the Original but The only thing missing in this film is the Great Lush Animation of the Superior Original. This Sequel is Decent and often Very Funny. Some might love this over the Original. It`s only depend of your tastes. But Burt Reyondls, who voiced in the Original-All Dogs Goes to Heaven is sorely missed. A film for all ages. Grade:B+.

Now,this movie was great. Diffeent from the original thumbelina, but s entertainig. The grandkids really enjoyed it. At first a little scary, the mole is ugly, but the more they watched, the more they ejoyed. Good job.

Adventurous, funny, melodic, nice story-line. Great movie for those lazy afternoons. See for yourself. Excellent performance by Jennifer Lowe Hewitt in "I am alone" and "I was once alone". You will love it!

(If you don't then you are definitely TOO OLD. Don't watch PG-13s.)

The less-detailed animation is the only cons I could find. My daugther and I loved watching little Tumbelina's journey to find her love and home. The story contains humour (the two moles are strikingly similar (and grotesque) to Pumba and Timon in Lion King), the little people village somehow feels like Snow White and Seven Dwarfs. The songs are worth listening to couple times. You will like the option to play them again (and with lyrics!).

the movie is soo cute. i loved it!!! the songs are great special the welcome to my hole!but most of all i liked the songi am so all alone! i think even for a cartoon tom was a cutie pie!i hope the soundtrack is out so i can get it!i watch it about 20 times is good!

Ok, so it sounded like a great plot for a movie--you know, lonely girl meets a great guy who "takes her away" from her life--that is, until he gets sick and, well, you know. Mary Louise-Parker is as charming as ever and can always deliver a line for a laugh. Peter Gallagher is also true to form--he is cute and romantic. Still, something is missing... For you guys out there I would definately call it a chich flick, one for the girls to watch with a bag of popcorn and a few tissues. All in all, not bad but then again certainly not oscar worthy.

I was not expecting much from Cupid & Cate.
After all, after reading that the 2000 film would be broadcast on St. Valentine's week via the Hallmark Channel, I was subjected to the tortures of endless promos for the "Love and Romance" week.
In short, I was expecting the quintessential, dreaded and demonic cash seeking "Date Movie".
You know the drill, a cute little romantic alleged comedy, starring the likes of Sandra Bullock or Hugh Grant or even worse, Sandra Bullock and Hugh Grant TOGETHER.
Even commercials or online descriptions of the film, portrayed the film as something like: "The only thing standing in the way of true love for Cate....is her fiancée".

Hand me the remote.... Survivor in the Amazon is on!

To be honest, the film starts off just that way. It was easily predicted that the well meaning, but dull as watching paint drying fiancée would hit the road before the start of the second act. However, it quickly became apparent that the romantic aspects of the film, although genuinely portrayed by an excellent cast, were secondary. The film is primarily about the strained relationship between a father and daughter and how their experiences parallel one another.
It made for fascinating viewing, with outstanding performances from Philip Bosco and Mary-Louise Parker. After struggling to sit through the nearly banal Mr. Wonderful, where Ms. Parker was given 1 descent scene, here she really shines. One can easily see the development in her art over her performances from the early 90's. As good as her performance was in A Place For Annie, she's even better here. A very tender and above all, real performance. Peter Gallagher and Brenda Fricker are also standouts.
Added attractions to the film are beautiful autumn scenes and Ms. Parker's rather eccentric wardrobe (check out her hat during the christening scene, just stunning).
Cupid & Cate is highly recommended viewing and would actually make a better Father's Day DVD purchase than for Cupid's holiday.
I even forgot The West Wing was on.
Three and a half stars out of four.

"Summer of Sam" could have been a nice study of the time period and how the killer affected the city of New York. I'll admit I was interested in all the parts that involved only the neighborhoods and large groups of people afraid of the killer, and the killer himself (that scene where the dog talks to him was...er...freaky to say the least).

But the movie falls flat to deliver. For one, it is WAY to long! In fact, now that I think about it, most of Spike Lee's films drag themselves into unbearable lengths of time (except for "Malcolm X", which was nicely paced). Second, the movie pretty much forgets that Sam exists and gets boiled down into the thousands of subplots by its many, many unlikable characters and their ridiculous problems.

I was hoping Sam would kill them all and that would be the end of the movie, but sadly that was not delivered. Oh well...

This is by far Spike Lee's grimmest film yet, which departs from his predominantly African-American themes and depicts the Italian side of New York City. Now, while it was also his greatest, in my opinion that is to say, I think its abrasive and rigorous tone is something that may draw plenty of viewers back, for this isn't at all the sort of film you'd presume you'd walk out of the theaters from with a smile on your face; this is not at all a film for kids, for it is even quite graphical toward its sexuality. (One scene, in particular, shows Vinny and Dionna inside some sort of nightclub that is scattered with nude people as they, like animals, are having sex with others whom they don't even know.)
Summer of Sam is an intensely gritty and angry epic that takes you back to New York's infamous summer of 1977. Lee's aspiring film does more than re-create the events that unfolded throughout that certain period of time; in addition to being an entertaining time capsule with an effervescent seventies soundtrack that knows just how to set the mood (and ever so influential, for I could not even begin to speculate of just how many other films used such tunes), it also deals graphically with the concept of the mob mentality.

The key characters, these number of despondent and allegedly "shady" people Lee created were not at all something he shied away from using as being stereotypes. Instead, he uses them to shatter conventional perceptions of racial and ethnic characteristics to show the beauty and deterioration of human nature.
The character that stood as being most appealing to me would have to be Ritchie (Adrien Brody), a local kid who has enigmatically progressed a look of a punk-rocker and a British accent, which later, as Son of Sam's plague of terror had a great impact among the citizens of New York, perplexed everyone, for they assumed he was that mass murderer merely by his cultural background and rap that apparently offended many. Lee's greatest films thrum with a wound-up vitality, and Summer of Sam resonates with lewdness, remorse, and fear. It does not regard the murderer, as many would assume that it does, but rather his victims, not those he slayed, but those whose overstimulated resourcefulness bloomed into a lynch mob mentality. There is a portion near the conclusion of the film that displays a side of human nature that is as loathsome as it is common: the fever to find someone to blame and the need to blame someone who is different-Ritchie being one who is different, which represents him as a misfit to the rest of the crowd who dance to the beats of disco music and wear flashy cloth.

The film also takes large detours into Vinny's sexual life, played by John Leguizamo, who vividly captures the apprehension his character undergoes as he strives to be lawful to the alleged "woman of his dreams". But it seems that the more he strives to be faithful to her, the more women he ends up sleeping with, and yet each time his appetite indulges these long-legged, big-breasted women who almost seem to supplicate for his "sexual skills", the more malevolence he has upon himself for being the man that he is, which proves true as he actually begins to assume that God himself is working against him, until ultimately such a deceitful lifestyle has great affect and it's all downhill from there, as it sadly was for everyone else.

Leguizamo's performance was in my opinion the finest since Al Pacino's in The Godfather III, but unfortunately it remains as my opinion, for I think all the heart and soul he put into this project was completely disregarded. True-his presence in the film claimed him to fame, but that was merely his presence, for his performance wasn't allegedly worthy of an award, which I think is a belief of pure ignorance. Fair is a word the academy obviously doesn't go by, for it seems that they seek of those who are the most flamboyant. "I see the new Latin artist as a pioneer, opening up doors for others to follow," says Leguizamo. "And when they don't open, we crowbar our way in. We are taking our culture and suturing it to America. Like gum on the bottom of a shoe, we are not going to disappear. Unlike other people who totally assimilated, we are more interested in co-assimilation...America may not realize it yet, but Latin prototypes are being created right now, and not just by me. They are these mambo kings and salsa queens, Aztec lords and Inca princesses, every Hernandez and Fernandez, whom this country will one day come to understand and respect." Now, all I'd have to say to that is...well, I'm with you all the way.

The summer of '77 belonged to Sam but as for the summer movie season of '99 (which provided such duds as Star Wars: Episode One and Wild, Wild West) our savior was none other than Spike Lee. With his latest outing as director he's managed to make one of the best '70's period pieces ever! The leading character's not an actor or even the director but the city. The crime-laden streets of NYC during the disco-era take on a life of their own. John Leguizamo stars as their leading occupant, a philandering husband who fears God has dispensed the .44 Caliber Killer as a messenger to convince him to stop cheating on his wife. When one of the murders hits close to home he and his friends (all of whom seem Bronx born and raised) begin to suspect a local. Their prime suspect is Adrien Brody (in a performace sadly overlooked by Oscar voters) who one morning dons a spiked hair-do, dog collar and begins speaking with an English accent. Temperature's raise and tempers flare, ultimately leading to violence and betrayal. Melding together elements of Pulp Fiction, Taxi Driver and Raging Bull, Spike Lee has made one of the year's three best films (Fight Club & American Beauty the others).

When I watched the version with Paul Ruebens as the title character, I liked it so I decided to watch this with my little brother, I did not like this movie at all, I feel bad for feeling that way cause Jonathan Taylor-Thomas was great in The Lion King, Man of the House and Home Improvement but this movie is not enjoyable or watchable at all.

This movie, i.e., VHS The Adventures of Pinocchio, is fairly well done, but doesnt really exhibit the charm and fantasy that the other film adaptations have given. The main reason is because I saw this in the cinema and was hoping for a fairy, and there was none. People who can sit through a movie without magic may up this a star, but I look for enchantment.

A lonely puppetmaker (Oscar-Winner:Martin Landau in a Impressive Role), who made a Puppet, the shape of a Little Boy. He wishes one night, that his Puppet would become a Real Boy (Voiced by Jonathan Talyor Thomas) and it came true but in the form of a Puppet.

Directed by Steve Barron (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Coneheads) made a good entertaining film, based on a novel by Carlo Collod`s Fable. Good Supporting Cast including:Genevieve Bujold, Udo Kier, Bebe Neuwirth and Rob Schnieder. This was a Box Office Disappointment in Theaters but it did better on Video. Walt Disney`s animated version is much better but this is bit different from Disney`s Version. Great Special Effects done by Jim Henson`s Creature Shop. Panavision. Grade:B+.

When I watched the version with Paul Ruebens as the title character, I liked it so I decided to watch this with my little brother, I did not like this movie at all, I feel bad for feeling that way cause Jonathan Taylor-Thomas was great in The Lion King, Man of the House and Home Improvement but this movie is not enjoyable or watchable at all.

This movie, i.e., VHS The Adventures of Pinocchio, is fairly well done, but doesnt really exhibit the charm and fantasy that the other film adaptations have given. The main reason is because I saw this in the cinema and was hoping for a fairy, and there was none. People who can sit through a movie without magic may up this a star, but I look for enchantment.

A lonely puppetmaker (Oscar-Winner:Martin Landau in a Impressive Role), who made a Puppet, the shape of a Little Boy. He wishes one night, that his Puppet would become a Real Boy (Voiced by Jonathan Talyor Thomas) and it came true but in the form of a Puppet.

Directed by Steve Barron (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Coneheads) made a good entertaining film, based on a novel by Carlo Collod`s Fable. Good Supporting Cast including:Genevieve Bujold, Udo Kier, Bebe Neuwirth and Rob Schnieder. This was a Box Office Disappointment in Theaters but it did better on Video. Walt Disney`s animated version is much better but this is bit different from Disney`s Version. Great Special Effects done by Jim Henson`s Creature Shop. Panavision. Grade:B+.

When I watched the version with Paul Ruebens as the title character, I liked it so I decided to watch this with my little brother, I did not like this movie at all, I feel bad for feeling that way cause Jonathan Taylor-Thomas was great in The Lion King, Man of the House and Home Improvement but this movie is not enjoyable or watchable at all.

This movie, i.e., VHS The Adventures of Pinocchio, is fairly well done, but doesnt really exhibit the charm and fantasy that the other film adaptations have given. The main reason is because I saw this in the cinema and was hoping for a fairy, and there was none. People who can sit through a movie without magic may up this a star, but I look for enchantment.

A lonely puppetmaker (Oscar-Winner:Martin Landau in a Impressive Role), who made a Puppet, the shape of a Little Boy. He wishes one night, that his Puppet would become a Real Boy (Voiced by Jonathan Talyor Thomas) and it came true but in the form of a Puppet.

Directed by Steve Barron (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Coneheads) made a good entertaining film, based on a novel by Carlo Collod`s Fable. Good Supporting Cast including:Genevieve Bujold, Udo Kier, Bebe Neuwirth and Rob Schnieder. This was a Box Office Disappointment in Theaters but it did better on Video. Walt Disney`s animated version is much better but this is bit different from Disney`s Version. Great Special Effects done by Jim Henson`s Creature Shop. Panavision. Grade:B+.

"Celebrity" features most of Woody Allen's trademarks: a huge number of characters, a lot of cameos, a lot of mini-stories that are connected between each other, and dialogues filled of whining, sexual allusions, irony and social satire. When the movie is well made, like "Hannah And Her Sisters", "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan", those Woody Allen's trademarks translate into a very good movie, with lots of fun and entertainment. But when is made like "Celebrity" the final result is a failure of a movie.

THE BEST: Without a doubt, Charlize Theron, Winona Ryder, Famke Janssen and Melanie Griffith are the best of the movie, all of them are beautiful women and make their scenes in "Celebrity" more interesting than they would have been without those gorgeous actresses.

Some of the dialogues in the Leonardo DiCaprio segments are funny and original. There are a lot of interesting cameos. The black & white photography gives personality to the film, in an era packed of explosions and computer generated special effects, is always interesting to see a black & white movie.

THE WORST: Without a doubt, the worst in the movie is the Kenneth Branagh character, he is a great actor, but in this movie he makes an increasingly irritating Woody Allen imitation. When the real Woody Allen is the central character, his voice, attitude and physic translate into a funny character, but when someone else does a cheap imitation, the central character becomes pathetic. A lot of the scenes and situations are very, very boring and pointless.

"Celebrity" is one of the less interesting movies of Woody Allen, it just feels too familiar, repetitive and boring.

Although it has some funny scenes and a great idea behind it, this movie just didn't seem to take off for me. Woody Allen has done much better in the past. Even his "Deconstructing Harry" was better than this. It was just too uneventful. I do agree that Leo DiCaprio had one of the best scense in the movie. It does show that the man can act, when given the right oppurtunity. (Although it is debatable if his small, almost un-important part was deserved of an Oscar nomination as a few reviewers have commented.) Kenneth Brannah's character was funny, but I think that actors playing the lead in Woody Allen comedies need to stop pretending they're Woody. Although I've only seen two do it, Brannah and John Cusack, I have no doubt others have as well (or will. I really hope Sean Penn doesn't try it out in this next movie!). I also wish Woody would stop giving the very talented Judy Davis such insecure, neurotic roles. I think I've seen her in three of his movies, and she seems to be the same in each. She is a beautiful and talented actress, and I think Woody should let her show it more (although I haven't seen her Oscar nominated performance in Husbands and Wives, so maybe he has at least once). Like I said, if you're a Woody fan, you might go for this. If not, don't expect a great movie. Get some of his classics instead.

Despite the title and the parade of characters who can be labeled as such, Woody Allen's 1998 film "Celebrity" is, like most of his films, about the peculiar ability of a man to destroy the important interpersonal relationships in his life. What makes "Celebrity" different is that this time around the Woody Allen part is not played by Allen, but by Kenneth Branagh. The actor, who has been nominated for an Oscar for playing Shakespeare on the silver screen, decides to play the Woody Allen character in "Celebrity" just like Woody Allen. Really. The dialogue is all written in Allen's distinctive voice, but instead of it being said by a small, wiry, balding Jewish comedian it is being said by a large, robust, wavy-haired Irish actor with the EXACT same cadences and inflections. Chances are that by the end of this film you still will not believe your ears on this one.

Now back to the film.

This time around the self-destructive main character is named Lee Simon (Branagh), a journalist and would be writer of a novel or screenplay if he can just get it done. Having cast aside his wife Robin (Judy Davis), Simon goes looking for love with most of the women who cross his path, from a movie star (Melanie Griffith) and a supermodel (a sizzling Charlize Theron) to an actress who plays bit parts (Wynona Ryder). Like Allen's script for this film, Lee's life is going around in circles. He cannot articulate to Robin the reason why he is leaving her any more than he can fully explain any of his actions as he moves from one woman to the next. As we are told at both the beginning and the end of the film, Lee Simon is a man who needs help. The punch line to the cosmic joke is that after Lee's departure plunges her into the depths of despair, Robin's life moves onward and upward because realizing there are gaps in her life she tries to fill them and improve herself, even if it means turning to the experience Nina (Bebe Neuwrith) for some interesting life lessons. By the end of the film she Robin is on top of her game and Lee is back where he started, and we realize this is something we have seen from Allen before and seen done better as well.

So, why did Allen simply not play himself? Because Woody Allen looks like Woody Allen. Today he looks more like an older Woody Allen (see "The Curse of the Jade Scorpion"). To put it bluntly, no supermodel is going to be interested in him. Thus we have the transposition of the Allen persona into the body of Branagh, who brings a manliness to the comic's neurotic mannerisms. When Branagh drives an antique Austin-Martin as a way of helping him pick up chicks, it sends a different signal than if it were Allen behind the wheel of that same car (besides, we know from "Annie Hall" that Woody can't drive). The choice of Branagh and his decision to play the part this way has a significance that extends beyond the idea that it is just some sort of a joke. There are two many sex scenes in this film for Allen to carried them off seriously. More importantly, if the nebbish that Allen has created over four decades of film can look like Branagh, then that is certainly something for us to think about.

If you have a choice between doing some tedious household chores, having minor surgery, and watching this film, I would go for the chores, or even the surgery - this film is much the most painful option.
*
Emotionally it is downright repulsive. No character is likeable, and the majority are completely repugnant. If, as is touted, this is meant to be a 'study' of the differences in attitude between the French and Americans in matters of the heart, then it a cynical, superficial, and wholly uninteresting 'study' - there are no worthwhile insights into human relationships, only tired, simplistic, and ultimately false cliches and stereotypes. It seems that the writer thinks that he has deeply analysed the French, that is all the French people and their entire culture, in terms of their purported readiness to say, 'But, of course', to any event, however disturbing. It is hard to think of a less intelligent analysis.
*
As a narrative, or as straight entertainment, it also fails dismally. The focus on money, as embodied by a painting by an old master, is incredibly dull. The characters are cardboard, with not even a hint of what lies behind their surface personas, and the latter are hardly engaging in themselves. Naomi Watts struggles to give some spine to her role, but the script defeats her at every turn. Kate Hudson doesn't even bother to struggle, figuring that simpering smiles and bafflement will suffice for her to pick up her pay check. The French actors sleepwalk their way through the nightmare.
*
This film is also far too long. So if you're looking for two hours of witless misanthropy, see 'Le Divorce'. I still can't quite believe that Merchant Ivory had anything to do with a film this bad.

Saw the previews a few times,and thought, "Oh, that looks like a harmless piece of fluff!"

Actually, it strikes me as a movie very insulting to the French. They are depicted as adulterous, two-faced, and out to steal your inheritance if possible. How different things would be if only they would have supported the invasion of Iraq!

There are a lot of good performances, that's true, and that's what does make the picture work as far as it does. The woman playing Kate Hudson's sister is absolutely beautiful, too.

One scene that did make me burst out laughing (but not the moviemakers' design) was when Kate visited a lingerie shop to outfit herself for an assignation. This totally flat-chested actress told the shopkeeper she needed a 34B! Oh, sacre bleu! There's just no way she could have that cup size!

It got a little too serious and then dipped into melodrama at the end; rather like an eclair that turns out to have a heavy crust.

See it if you must, but I was vaguely disappointed.

...then you are definately, 'le American'. Okay so that's being a bit general. This movie was more an entertaining look at two different cultures--including food, wine, shopping, sex, and how they clash, then a meat-and-potatoes romance or drama. It didn't have a huge sopping love sory/action/and for that I was grateful. I have to say, most of the classic, well-loved novels and movies surround this similar premise: a young naive girl in a strange country, grows to love it, and finds herself. This movie is what it is, and it is utterly delightful, and alhtough cliched, most truthful, in fact, I should know, I'm an American who lived in Paris for years. As far as movies of 2003 goes, this is the creme de' le creme! Excellent!