As a person who works in HR I could relate to the many themes in this film. You don't have to be pro-gay to like this film. If you are someone who loathes political correctness you will probably like it even more. I really enjoyed Daniel's performance as the straight, average, dull man who is assumed to be gay, only to find the pretence actually works in his favour. I love how he regained his courage and in the end, unleashed the "inner man." That line how he says "being gay taught me more about being a man than anything else" is a classic. Also when he puts in a sexual harassment complaint against his blonde, attractive supervisor, only to have the manager say to her "any other man in this office would love you to harass them." I love how this film plays around with the ideas of Political correctness in a very tongue of cheek way, without resorting to luridness or cheap humour.
Reviews
5 Reviews
Bride & Prejudice
(2004)
Moulin Rouge Indian Style
20 March 2005
This film reminded me a lot like a cross between Moulin Rouge! and Fiddler on the Roof with its spontaneous musical numbers and tranvestian parades. It was not as satisfying as Bend it Like Beckham which had a freshness to the story and everyday charm of ordinary people in suburban life. This film was flawed on several levels: - lead actress was impossibly pretty with her perfect blow dried hair and did nothing but roll her eyes all the way through the film. This was the most annoying thing! - lead male character with the name "Will Darcy". Far too contrived attempt at pointing out it is an adaption of "Pride and Prejudice". After Bridgette Jones' Mark Darcy (also based on P&P), how many other lead actors will we have with the name of "Darcy"? - bad dialogue. Again too contrived and added no depth to the characters. Felt like I was watching an extended episode of "Home and Away" with the way the lead characters were bickering, in a poor attempt that they hate each other but then fall in love.
The good things going for this film was Martin Henderson (a New Zealender by birth and ex-Home and Awayer) whose looks made up for his substandard acting talent in this film. Looked too cute in several Indian costumes including at the end when he is banging the drum. Also I do have to give him credit for his reaction to the Snake dance - that was really funny! If it weren't for him, this film would have been complete waste of my time.
The good things going for this film was Martin Henderson (a New Zealender by birth and ex-Home and Awayer) whose looks made up for his substandard acting talent in this film. Looked too cute in several Indian costumes including at the end when he is banging the drum. Also I do have to give him credit for his reaction to the Snake dance - that was really funny! If it weren't for him, this film would have been complete waste of my time.
Hamlet
(2000)
I didn't like it
14 February 2003
I only liked two things about this film: 1) The performance by Kyle McLachlan as Claudius and 2) The play within the play.
But first, let me say from the outset that on the whole, this version of Hamlet was flat and uninspired. Ethan Hawke practically croaked his lines all the way through which rendered much of the poetic dialogue in the play as dull and meaningless. Secondly, the director tried so hard to be creative with the modern surroundings, and yet it did not gel in this movie. WHY in God's name would Hamlet and Laeters duel in a swordfight in a modern day setting? WHY would a country such as England execute two innocent citizens due to a message in a laptop? And why is it that in practically EVERY Hamlet movie I've seen, including this one, does Horatio just stand off to the side with a disinterested look on his face and not show shock and emotion when Hamlet is dying? Everyone just seems to stand around staring at the dying character.
Reciting "To be or not to be" in a blockbuster video shop completely misses the point. Sure, in this movie it was Hamlet's world of movies and violence, but it failed to really show what was going on in his mind. We rarely get to see his anger or his confusion or his sharp intellect which was the essence of Hamlet, instead we get this grunge brooding portrait ala Reality Bites type character.
Kudos should go to Kyle McLachlan for not falling into the trap of delivering his lines without meaning - he delivered every line flawlessly and made it sound so convincing in a modern setting. His version of Claudius as the charming yet smarmy businessman with devilish like intentions was probably the best version of Claudius I have seen for a long while.
But first, let me say from the outset that on the whole, this version of Hamlet was flat and uninspired. Ethan Hawke practically croaked his lines all the way through which rendered much of the poetic dialogue in the play as dull and meaningless. Secondly, the director tried so hard to be creative with the modern surroundings, and yet it did not gel in this movie. WHY in God's name would Hamlet and Laeters duel in a swordfight in a modern day setting? WHY would a country such as England execute two innocent citizens due to a message in a laptop? And why is it that in practically EVERY Hamlet movie I've seen, including this one, does Horatio just stand off to the side with a disinterested look on his face and not show shock and emotion when Hamlet is dying? Everyone just seems to stand around staring at the dying character.
Reciting "To be or not to be" in a blockbuster video shop completely misses the point. Sure, in this movie it was Hamlet's world of movies and violence, but it failed to really show what was going on in his mind. We rarely get to see his anger or his confusion or his sharp intellect which was the essence of Hamlet, instead we get this grunge brooding portrait ala Reality Bites type character.
Kudos should go to Kyle McLachlan for not falling into the trap of delivering his lines without meaning - he delivered every line flawlessly and made it sound so convincing in a modern setting. His version of Claudius as the charming yet smarmy businessman with devilish like intentions was probably the best version of Claudius I have seen for a long while.
The Sketch Show
(2001–2003)
It's funny without trying to be too clever
26 January 2003
Re: Transparency of jokes.
The Sketch Show is the sort of comedy that is hilarious without trying to be too clever. That's what I like about it - its simplicity. The humour comes from the way its acted and delivered - without needing to resort to excessive crudeness or political impersonations which you find in a lot of comedy shows these days. It's light entertainment that is a good filler for half an hour every Monday night.
The Sketch Show is the sort of comedy that is hilarious without trying to be too clever. That's what I like about it - its simplicity. The humour comes from the way its acted and delivered - without needing to resort to excessive crudeness or political impersonations which you find in a lot of comedy shows these days. It's light entertainment that is a good filler for half an hour every Monday night.
Chicago
(2002)
All that muscle tone
24 January 2003
After the editing monstrosity that was "Maulin Rogue" (spelling error intended), I was cautious about going to see another musical film. But I'm glad I did, cos Chicago has everything that MR lacked - an engaging storyline, smart, snappy editing, interesting characters, marvelous songs....and all that jazz.
Chicago is interesting as a play/story because it intertwines so many topical themes into the one film, particularly its focus on media sensationalism and exploitation that turns suspects into celebrities, and shockingly in this case, heroes (think: OJ Simpson). The case connived by Billy Flynn (Richard Gere) has an intimate "behind the scenes feel" of how the evidence can be easily fabricated and public opinion swayed to influence the outcome of a trial. That Roxie Hart (Rene Z) and Velma Kelly (Catherine Z) are acquitted while the innocent Hungarian woman is executed illustrates that "justice" is only affordable to those with the resources to pay for a "silver tongued" lawyer.
But Chicago is also a film that doesn't aim or pretend to preach, or take itself too seriously - as seen in the wonderfully performed ventriloquism scene. It took a few moments for me to work out whether the performers were actually dolls or actually real! (Mind you, that is not a comment on anyone's acting ability in this film).
However, while I wouldn't have cast Richard Gere as Billy Flynn (the scene where he dances in his jocks left me pleading he put his trousers back on), he does a passable job. My respect for the character (albeit a corrupt one) increased when it transpired there would be no romance between him and either of the two attractive leading ladies - which is unusual for this sort of film that was dripping with sexual energy.
That's all I can really say about Chicago and all that jazz, except if you still are hesitating to sit through two hours of flashy dancing and raging female hormones dominating the jail rooms, then watching Velma Kelly - the ultimate vamp if ever there was one - sucking up to Roxie Hart is well worth the two hours.
Chicago is interesting as a play/story because it intertwines so many topical themes into the one film, particularly its focus on media sensationalism and exploitation that turns suspects into celebrities, and shockingly in this case, heroes (think: OJ Simpson). The case connived by Billy Flynn (Richard Gere) has an intimate "behind the scenes feel" of how the evidence can be easily fabricated and public opinion swayed to influence the outcome of a trial. That Roxie Hart (Rene Z) and Velma Kelly (Catherine Z) are acquitted while the innocent Hungarian woman is executed illustrates that "justice" is only affordable to those with the resources to pay for a "silver tongued" lawyer.
But Chicago is also a film that doesn't aim or pretend to preach, or take itself too seriously - as seen in the wonderfully performed ventriloquism scene. It took a few moments for me to work out whether the performers were actually dolls or actually real! (Mind you, that is not a comment on anyone's acting ability in this film).
However, while I wouldn't have cast Richard Gere as Billy Flynn (the scene where he dances in his jocks left me pleading he put his trousers back on), he does a passable job. My respect for the character (albeit a corrupt one) increased when it transpired there would be no romance between him and either of the two attractive leading ladies - which is unusual for this sort of film that was dripping with sexual energy.
That's all I can really say about Chicago and all that jazz, except if you still are hesitating to sit through two hours of flashy dancing and raging female hormones dominating the jail rooms, then watching Velma Kelly - the ultimate vamp if ever there was one - sucking up to Roxie Hart is well worth the two hours.
Tell Your Friends