natrc2003
Joined Nov 2009
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews14
natrc2003's rating
I came into this film knowing pretty much next to nothing about it -- I do remember that one Proclaimers song from the 80s, of course. Mostly I wanted to watch Freya Mavor again, having recently seen her in "La Dame dans l'auto avec des lunettes et un fusil." If there has ever been anyone born to be on the big screen, it's Freya Mavor.
Of course, the super-added bonus was discovering that Antonia Thomas is in the film too. I didn't know any of the other actors -- I'm not Scottish -- and I question some of the casting, mostly because their singing voices (I'm assuming everyone sang their own part) aren't up to par. But Mavor and Thomas are quite capable of carrying the movie on their own. Both are luminous.
Now, if you're looking for a unique and unexpected story, don't bother. You won't get it from this film, which pretty much hits every generic romantic comedy/musical theater cliché.
But this hardly matters, as the cast -- and all the extras -- obviously are enjoying themselves immensely. Their enthusiasm comes through loud and clear and the pleasure and pride of everyone involved becomes part of the storyline, perfectly setting up the final scene.
And that final scene is one of the absolute best rom-com/musical payoffs I've ever seen. Heck, I actually started tearing up over it, it was that well-done. The movie is worth it just to reach that moment. Perfect!
Of course, the super-added bonus was discovering that Antonia Thomas is in the film too. I didn't know any of the other actors -- I'm not Scottish -- and I question some of the casting, mostly because their singing voices (I'm assuming everyone sang their own part) aren't up to par. But Mavor and Thomas are quite capable of carrying the movie on their own. Both are luminous.
Now, if you're looking for a unique and unexpected story, don't bother. You won't get it from this film, which pretty much hits every generic romantic comedy/musical theater cliché.
But this hardly matters, as the cast -- and all the extras -- obviously are enjoying themselves immensely. Their enthusiasm comes through loud and clear and the pleasure and pride of everyone involved becomes part of the storyline, perfectly setting up the final scene.
And that final scene is one of the absolute best rom-com/musical payoffs I've ever seen. Heck, I actually started tearing up over it, it was that well-done. The movie is worth it just to reach that moment. Perfect!
This movie exemplifies the entire problem with the glut of Superhero films these days -- they're basically extremely expensive cartoons. Which is fine, if you're five years old and still able to identify with an animated figure, suspend one's belief and go along for the ride. But as an adult, Ant-man, like most of the other Marvel vehicles in the last decade, just falls flat.
When 80 percent of the film -- and 100 percent of the action -- is CGI, there is absolutely no suspense, no sensation that the characters are truly at risk. It's the equivalent of watching a Roadrunner cartoon. Sure, it's funny. But it's no more than that. And a Roadrunner cartoon is only a couple minutes long. Not nearly two hours.
The only thing that can possibly make these CGI films work is the casting - a well-cast actor is still able to overcome the flatness of CGI (Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, Robert Downey in the first Iron Man). In the case of Ant-man, however, the cast just feels like a B-team. Paul Rudd's a far better schlubby sad-sack rom-com sidekick than superhero, and the rest of the cast, primarily TV actors, makes this film feel like a made-for-TV movie. (This was especially problematic in the case of Corey Stoll, who is best known for his role as a loser alcoholic - very hard to take him seriously as the villain!)
I found it particularly hilarious when the showed off Rudd's "new buff" body -- I sure hope that was CGI too, because he truly looked ridiculous.
But this is another huge problem with the Marvel films. They take themselves far too seriously. It would be a lot easy to sit back and enjoy the CGI if the films would laugh at themselves a bit more.
When 80 percent of the film -- and 100 percent of the action -- is CGI, there is absolutely no suspense, no sensation that the characters are truly at risk. It's the equivalent of watching a Roadrunner cartoon. Sure, it's funny. But it's no more than that. And a Roadrunner cartoon is only a couple minutes long. Not nearly two hours.
The only thing that can possibly make these CGI films work is the casting - a well-cast actor is still able to overcome the flatness of CGI (Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, Robert Downey in the first Iron Man). In the case of Ant-man, however, the cast just feels like a B-team. Paul Rudd's a far better schlubby sad-sack rom-com sidekick than superhero, and the rest of the cast, primarily TV actors, makes this film feel like a made-for-TV movie. (This was especially problematic in the case of Corey Stoll, who is best known for his role as a loser alcoholic - very hard to take him seriously as the villain!)
I found it particularly hilarious when the showed off Rudd's "new buff" body -- I sure hope that was CGI too, because he truly looked ridiculous.
But this is another huge problem with the Marvel films. They take themselves far too seriously. It would be a lot easy to sit back and enjoy the CGI if the films would laugh at themselves a bit more.
I spent an excellent summer going to the midnight showings of Rocky Horror at the Art Cinema in New Brunswick, NJ every Saturday night. This one of the earliest showings of the movie outside of NYC apparently, and the cult was still in its infancy when I started going -- there'd only be a handful of us in the early days, but by the end of the summer, the house would always be packed, and people were shouting more and more things at the screen. We were encouraged to dress up, of course, but it hadn't yet reached the point where people started doing full-scale shadow performances during the screening (which I'd have found annoying anyway).
The point is, it was an excellent summer, and I have great memories of it. I do watch the movie now and again at home, but it'll never be the same... or so I thought...
Well, this live show isn't quite the same. Which is probably what makes it so excellent. The great cast, great performances and -- above all -- the great spirit both by the performers AND the audience really makes this a new experience of its own.
My favorite of the cast was Haley Flaherty, whose Janet Weiss was perfection. I really appreciate the fact that she, and pretty much all the performers, didn't try to reinvent their roles, but stayed true to the original performances. It was great to see Richard O'Brien there too.
The point is, it was an excellent summer, and I have great memories of it. I do watch the movie now and again at home, but it'll never be the same... or so I thought...
Well, this live show isn't quite the same. Which is probably what makes it so excellent. The great cast, great performances and -- above all -- the great spirit both by the performers AND the audience really makes this a new experience of its own.
My favorite of the cast was Haley Flaherty, whose Janet Weiss was perfection. I really appreciate the fact that she, and pretty much all the performers, didn't try to reinvent their roles, but stayed true to the original performances. It was great to see Richard O'Brien there too.