Tag: Jamie Lee Curtis

THE LAST SHOWGIRL (2024)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Gia Coppola 

Written By: Kate Gersten 

Cinematography: Autumn Durald Arkapaw 

Editor: Blair McClendon And Cam McLaughlin 

Cast: Pamela Anderson, Jamie Lee Curtis, Billie Lourd, Kiernan Shipka, Brenda Song, Dave Bautista, Jason Schwartzman, Linda Montana 

A seasoned showgirl must plan for her future when her show abruptly closes after a 30-year run.

————————————————————————

This from falters, but it’s not entirely its fault, as the film was heavily hyped to be a comeback vehicle but then when it was released, it was a whimper, though the way it was talked about by the few who didn’t see it you expected so much more and better than it had this kind of hype about it and then, when you watch the film, Kenmore has a light touch but you were already expecting to see so much more now you can’t help but feel a little disappointed.

Which is why it’s usually best to go in with no expectations and hopefully most of you will go into this film with not too many expectations then maybe you can get into it but for me it felt like a lost cause almost.

This film could easily be compared to a star in trying to say some thing about her career in popularity, where the main character is a former show girl who has always lived that kind of lifestyle gotten by on her luxe, and try to support herself and her daughter throughout the years and now that she’s older kind of being pushed out as the show that she stars in is being canceled and can’t seem to get a job In any other shows, though she has experience, she doesn’t have the formal so-called education for the jobs, and also due to her age.

It’s a film that’s sad man tries to give the character dignity even though throughout, she seems to be a pushover who seems to only want to stand up to the wrong people the people who actually care about her, but are making her answer for her flaws and mistakes. Unfortunately they’re asking while the world seems to be against her.

The film has a guerrilla style camera work, and it does have a story deep down in there, but it just doesn’t feel like a very strong as the film try to be more of a slice of life that’s not going to please everyone and more revolves around Pamela Anderson’s character than us really getting to know too many of the other characters.

As even the younger stripper, she works with her costars in the show kind of looked at her to be a mama hen even though her own daughter feels like she neglected her when she was growing up even though Anderson’s character was trying to do the best that she could add time is, it might’ve been selfish, but it was some thing that she loved where she had to choose between her to loves, and she gave one more attention than the other.

There’s nothing bad about the film, but I believe your interest in the film will be as how much do you really care about her character or any of the characters and while I applied it for a showing a film about a woman dealing with feeding beauty and it seems like aging makes you feel you’re made to feel useless

Especially with the supporting role played surprisingly by Jamie Lee Curtis in a way to tan overly made up cocktail waitress who used to be a dancer, but had to go to waitressing and still misses the days of dancing, but also seems to have other personal problems of living, a fast lifestyle even though she can give good life advice, and somehow is worse off than Pamela Anderson’s character though like her characters make up, she might be a bit much, but what is needed a contemporary for Pamela Anderson’s character to truly talk to you and deal with.

One wishes they could’ve gotten into the characters more, as it seems to deal with surface level, but it never really makes you wanna go deeper than the surface of what is shown even though the main point of the film is to go underneath that to see the person and not the beauty or the Luxury or the faded glory but it feels like something that could’ve been told and still manage to have a little bit more to it.

As one remembers her at the peak of her popularity with a bombshell, she was one of the bombshells to reference over the years that has truly asked her to act, even if the character is familiar

This film was talked about as a possible. Oscar consideration. Slow down, would have fooled the industry just because she shows herself with no make up written for her in mind. 

As it even struggles to keep the audiences interest at 89 minutes as there’s just not enough, this feels like a film that would’ve done gangbusters in the 1990s independency but here it just feels like fluff and sort of a gift to Pamela Anderson for making it in Hollywood after all these years as it’s the first time I’ve seen with her that really and challenges are even though it feels also custom-made for

Grade: C

PERFECT (1985)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: James Bridges

Written By: James Bridges and Aaron Latham

Based on Articles By: Aaron Latham 

Cinematography: Gordon Willis 

Editor: Jeff Gourson 

Cast: John Travolta, Jamie Lee Curtis, Marilu Henner, Jann Wenner, Laraine Newman, Anne De Salvo, Kenneth Welsh, Chelsea Field, David Paymer

Fed up with writing obituaries for a local New Jersey newspaper, the inquisitive and ambitious journalist, Adam Lawrence, finally gets his big break, when–as a Rolling Stone reporter–gets to interview a well-off entrepreneur accused of drug-dealing. However, one brief look at the tight-bodied members of a modern gym will have Adam itching to write an exposé on the latest craze of fitness and health centres, where aerobics instructors like the ferociously-astonishing, Jessie, are the absolute stars. But, Jessie, really despises interviewers. Will she ever let him into her sultry world of cool music, high-energy exercise, and perfection?

————————————————————————

One could see the appeal of this movie at the time. as more revolving around the romance between the two leads played by John Travolta and Jamie Lee Curtis. You need to fill the time of this movie that is way too long.

This film is over two hours long and the tale could’ve been told and 90 minutes. so instead of just a romance, the film also wants to talk about journalistic responsibility not only that but how to build a story.

As the film tries to show, yes there is a reporter trying to get the truth out to the people and tell a story, but also how the story is only the view of the reporter and might not tell the full story or is edited so that details are left out, and also the aftermath that the story can do two people who never intended originally to be victims.

One can see why John Travolta chose this movie as it’s by James Bridges, who also directed him in his head urban cowboy so this is another kind of down and dirty romance. Only this is given more of a flashy treatment as it is tying for rolling stone magazine, for which John Travolta is a reporter of and , the editor and chief of the magazine at the time Jan wiener even plays himself a version of himself under a different name.

The script was also written by written by the actual writer that John Travolta character is based on who wrote a story about sports clubs or aerobics clubs being the new singles club so it all feels like an in-house production.

I will say that Jamie Lee Curtis looks fantastic in the movie and her character is so cool and has such a fashionable look that you just wish her character was in a different and better film. 

John Travolta tries his best and makes his character charismatic and dramatic, but he doesn’t make him interesting.

That is the problem with this film at first, watching this film as a look back at the fashions and mentality of the times, but it moves along so slowly that even any campiness factor within the film slowly drains away until your hit with what is supposed to be drama but he just doesn’t seem in the right way that the film is hoping it will just want resolution as you’re wondering where is this movie going to go?

Seem to have a lot going for at first it has some unbilled cameos by Lauren Hutton and Carly Simon and it seems like a typically streamline film that was made to be tied into a fan, but then also tried to have some substance and that might be the problem is that that substance dragged down the film that not that it wouldn’t necessarily have been good Even without the substance, but it could be forgiven for naïveness

So give credit for at least trying to be worth something.

The film is fascinating to watch though after a while it’s feels a little monotonous, almost like a sitcom where you wait for the two leads to finally get together and then they do and then the show kind of runs out of steam as it doesn’t know what else to do or focus on , watching just to see where it’s going to go if you’re a Die Hard that’s what it feels like watching this film. It goes on for way too long and so many characters consequences and plots that don’t seem to go anywhere or are introduced but not more depth.

For instance, the Lorraine Newman character seems like the one chance for the film to actually have a character of death who has tragic ramifications around her and offers some traumatic consequences, but the film seems to hint at these prospects and then totally drops them so that just becomes another background character that we do with.

It’s not exactly the same with Mary Lou character who is Bill heavily but is given very little to do more than maybe be in the background of scenes even though she looks great too in this film as much as Jamie Lee Curtis, but other than just being another body in the background She doesn’t have much to do.

I’m sure this film has its fans and Jamie Lee Curtis and John Travolta still defended though this was a flop a big one for the studio and John Travolta who seem to not start another film for another four years after this film so he did kind of a hit though again I think everyone is proud of the film, at least attempted to even if it didn’t do it successfully.

I would say the warnings but watch at your own risk. It’s not the worst thing in the world, but it’s reputation proceeds and there is a reason for that there is some decent stuff in here, but you have to get through so much bad stuff just to get to it, including a ridiculously long aerobics scene where John Travolta just keeps thrusting his hips endlessly.

The one aspect of the film is that it has so many aerobics and workout scenes that this film under normal circumstances could’ve been a musical if you just take all the aerobic scenes and made them into song and dance productions it seems it wants to be a musical, but physically, it’s a romantic drama about reporting and aerobics.

Grade: D+

YOU AGAIN (2010)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Andy Flickman
Written By: Moe Jelline
Cinematography: David Hennings 
Editor: David Rennie And Keith Brachman

Cast: Kristen Bell, Odette Annable, Sigourney Weaver, Jamie Lee Curtis, Victor Garber, Betty White, James Wolk, Kristin Chenowith, Kyle Bornheimer, Christine Lakin, Patrick Duffy

When a young woman realizes her brother is about to marry the girl who bullied her in high school, she sets out to expose the fiancée’s true colors.

There was once upon a time when studios were still making romantic comedies and they kept casting Kristen bell in these movies even though I knew them not to be my particular cup of tea. I kept watching them as I am a fan of hers. At least this film has a stacked cast of names 

This is what I would call disposable cinema. As it is good in the moment and easily forgettable. Never leave too much of a lasting Impression. It’s good at the moment when you need to see something new. 

Now if anything one would hope that this film inspires not to make such simple films. Unless the mediocre is what inspired some. The film shows the talent of the actors. Who tries to make the thin material work.

The film seems like a holdover from the 1980s when there were a lot of these types of disposable entertainment hyped up. Films that had simple premises. Though somehow some of them were able to carry some kind of identity for themselves. By either the talent in front of or behind the camera. 

Director Andy Flickman knows how to make things look excellent and appealing.

The cast list has some surprisingly big male talent for a film that seems more like a paycheck only for most.

It’s nice to see a film like this as it has a good spirit and good intentions. It does what it sets out to do, not subtlety. Yet it’s elementary but I think you know that going in. So you can’t hold it totally against the film.

The acting in the flashback sections of the film is bad. As it comes off as too over the top but also just bad.

Most of the cast know better and have done better films and work but both of the female leads Kristen Bell and Odette Annabale need better roles offered to them. As these roles might look good and maybe even easy on paper. It might even be a surprise hit and up their star power, but most likely it will leave them open to making this same kind of similar film. It would be ok if they had little to no talent but they have proven that they do. 

GRADE: D+

MY GIRL 2 (1994)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Howard Zieff 
Written By: Janet Kovalcik 
Based On Characters created by: Laurice Ehlewany 
Cinematography By: Paul Elliott 
Editor: Wendy Greene Bricmont 

Cast: Anna Chlumsky, Austin O’Brein, Richard Mausr, Christine Ebsrsole, Dan Ayckroyd, Jamie Lee Curtis, Gerrit Graham, Ben Stein, Keone Young, Devon Gummersall


Vada Sultenfuss has a holiday coming up, and an assignment: to do an essay on someone she admires and has never met. She decides she wants to do an assignment on her mother, but quickly realizes she knows very little about her. She manages to get her father to agree to let her go to LA to stay with her Uncle Phil and do some research on her mother. Once in LA, she finds herself under the protection of Nick, the son of Phil’s girlfriend, who at first is very annoyed at losing his holidays to escort a hick *girl* around town. However, he soon becomes more involved in the difficult search.

This film is just as warm and charming as the first film. Though weaker overall in feel and subject matter

This is the last film that Howard Zieff directed, because he became increasingly debilitated by Parkinson’s disease. Carrie Fisher was also an uncredited script doctor on this film

It’s character from the first film we feel a connection with and want to see what is happening in their lives, but the movie offers less of a reason. So that it feels more like we are dropping by while something is developing . Which might have. Even the movies aim, it just never feels as compelling and things seem to happen more in a leisurely pace.

Which makes it seem like a film that adults might appreciate more then kids. Unless they are just connected to the characters from seeing the first film.

It goes more into the hippie lifestyle that she is around as well as delving more into a friendship than romance

The thing that is missing is that in the first film it was a coming of age story and we were introduced to her making her way through the world and seeing how her family worked while this outsider came in. As well as including a tragedy that you knew was coming

Though this film feels less needed than that film As it feels more like an unnecessary continuation of a story and characters where we leave half of the character from the original who appear more in a cameo. Which also loses some of the charm. As it’s nice to see them but we don’t get to see as much of them as we would Like.

And now she is dealing more with her uncle form the first film who here has a bigger part and we get to see him more humanized in his relationship with her and a romantic one. So we are dealing with the original character in a whole new landscape which seems smart, but isn’t as precious as the character is older and a lot more knowledgeable. It stays clean but she isn’t as naive.

Here the character is doing research more into her deceased mother which is what take up most of the films actions and time. She is also in a strange location for her. So she is exploring new territory. While being around the counter culture she still manages to stay innocent.

Strangely though older she is less boy crazy and fascinated by relationships. Which seems to be why by the end she finds herself in a minor one. Though still not really having any female friends. Which the film starts with her having but losing them to jealousy.

Anna Chlumsky has always been an earnest actress her performances have always felt truthful and soulful full of confidence. She is charming and is energetic in her performance. That feels adventurous and guides each performance she has. Though at least throughout she stay confident. Which leaves a good message and role model for little girls watching it and seeing themselves In the character. Luckily over the years she has come back as a major actress in adulthood and been Emmy nominated quite a few times on the award winning television show VEEP

Maybe it is that I grew up watching and dealing with the first film emotionally so that when the sequel was finally announced. –I looked forward to it and built it up on my head so that when i finally saw it I couldn’t help but find it disappointing. More as me and other might have grown out of it. As it came too little too late.

Now this is not a bad movie at all. If anything it feels heartwarming

Though it works as a continuation of a character like in the films MY AMERICAN COUSIN to AMERICAN BOYFRIENDS, also THE YEAR MY VOICE BROKE to FLIRTING, only skewing younger. Though offers motivation and moving into more adult themes for the characters here it maintains an innocence for everyone

The supporting characters are fun if not too memorable. The investigation is not that interesting or encompassing they seem only there to keep the story moving and the characters moving allowing for some developments.

Not too much of a side story by introducing another suitor for the uncle’s girlfriend.

This was a sequel that I was looking Forward to even though I was old enough to be skeptical and think how were they going to be able to equal the power (at least for me) of the original. As one Wanted to see the further adventures of Vada. 

Which is exactly what this film does. She is a little older abd the film transports her out of her hometown into sprawling San Francisco. Bigger city for bigger adventures. As this film comes off more as episodic.

The seed are planeted early in the film. When her friend who we last saw her playing. With st the end of the original. Is jealous and ditches her for a boy who seems to constantly be flirting by with vada and vada In turn has no interest in nor picks up on it. 

So as she searches for stories about her mother. The movie revolves around relationships. Her uncle and his girlfriends. Her and the girlfriends son who accompanies her everywhere In her fact finding mission and even her relationship with her mother and accepting her stepmother and her soon to be born Sibling.

That is what most films are about relationships. This one offers a bit of romance between her and the girlfriends son but other then a kids that is as deep as it gets.

One of the charms of the original so is that it came out of nowhere and had a more natural sense of character as well as generally good innocent humor for the most part. So that it felt like a gem out of nowhere that was also felt classical in A small town novel way. It felt comfortable.

Where as this film feels like most of the film it is stretching and feels way too planned out. It feels more designed then coming off natural and it kind of spoils it.

The film Still has some off the wall charm but not enough to make this film feel like it is worth the effort.

Though then Again I might be wrong as I was younger when the first film Came out and more cynical when the sequel came out and might have believed I was above it all. Kids might actually like it. So might those who took the first film to heart. Even though I did and still found myself disliking the sequels

Grade: C

HALLOWEEN: H20 – 20 YEARS LATER (1998)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

Directed By: Steve Miner 
Written By: Robert Zappia & Matt Greenberg 
Story By: Robert Zappia 
Based on Characters Created By: John Carpenter & Debra Hill
Cinematograpy By: Daryn Okada 
Editor: Patrick Lussier 

Cast: Jamie Lee Curtis, Josh Harnett, Michelle Williams, Jodi Lyn O’keefe, Adam Arkin, LL Cool J, Adam Hann Byrd, Janet Leigh, Joseph Gordon Levitt, Branden Williams

On Halloween in 1963, Michael Myers murdered his sister, Judith. In 1978, he broke out to kill his other sister, Laurie Strode. He killed all of her friends, but she escaped. A few years later, she faked her death so he couldn’t find her. But now, in 1998, Michael has returned and found all the papers he needs to find her. He tracks her down to a private school where she has gone under a new name with her son, John. And now, Laurie must do what she should have done a long time ago and finally decided to hunt down the evil one last time. 

The film tries to write a check that it can’t cash. The film seems to try to say this is the Halloween sequel you have been waiting for. We even get Jamie Lee Curtis coming back to reprise her historic role. IT is worth it to see her again. They even brought in the hot screenwriter at the time of SCREAM to write it. Unfortunately, it oddly feels watered down or weak considering what the original 2 films were. 

This feels more like a homage that is more teen-friendly. I like the fact that it plays more on scares though only with one victim do we see the chase and the slaughter as most scenes are the chases or surprise appearance then we go to another scene and the discovery of the butchered body. The film does keep the promise of the series with a stark opening. It matched SCREAM with the killing of a star in the opening. The studio sold this film to the audience who never read the fine print. It is directed by Steve Miner director of films such as FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 2 & 3-. No great horror opuses. 

The film was started as and idea by Jamie Lee Curtis who wanted to return to the role and work with director John Carpenter again. Carpenter declined but Curtis was still interested in doing the film. Originally the film was supposed to be in continuity with parts 4 -6. Scenes were filmed that acknowledged it until it was better to be a continuation of the original film and its sequel. Kevin Williamson the star screenwriter at the time of Scream and Scream 2 wrote a very detailed treatment that the screenwriters followed the details of closely. It was rumored he actually completed a draft of the screenplay in close collaboration with Jamie lee Curtis. That included a detective role that was to be played by Charles S. Dutton who filmed some scenes but were ultimately cut out of the film. 

Janet Leigh makes a return to the silver screen for the first time in 18 years. I’m sure it helped to convince her to return to the screen having her daughter star in the film. This was the first Halloween movie to not involve Dr. Loomis What follows throughout this movie is a sanitized version of a horror movie. With violence only when the film is in danger of getting boring. 

This is like a starter horror film for the squeamish. It has plenty of winks and nods to the audience. Jokes without being an intentional comedy or actually funny. The film has plenty of false scares and the relentless Michael Myers pursuit hiding in the shadows. He even displays a bit of carnage. but the film seems more pinpointed. Not really for teenagers, but preteens with some objectionable material. This is also one of the movies that unleashed Josh Hartnett onto an unsuspecting public. 

I saw this film in a movie theater on opening night and the woman who was sitting next to me had never seen a horror film before and screamed at even the little stuff. That was scarier than anything in the film. The only reason this movie works is Jamie Lee Curtis’s realistic performance. 

 I have read the original script and treatment for this film. It could have been worse and Mrs. Curtis decided to do this film supposedly to help end the series. She filmed the ending here and another end which ended up being the beginning of the next film of the series. I believe she just wanted out once and for all. Either way Her killing of him, or him killing her. It’s a shame at the end of an iconic female character.

I like that at times the film tries to go more psychologically by having Curtis’s character have visions of him that she doesn’t know if they are from her drinking or just hallucinating from the time of year around Halloween which she seems to still constantly have. 

They set the location at a school but have everyone go away on a trip so that there are only a few people around left to be slaughtered. Instead of a grand blood bath. The confrontation scene between the two is pretty big and monumental as a fan of the films. Too bad the film falters and doesn’t support it. 

The film seems like a studio tried to mix everything that was successful in the films at that point and put it into this film. Even if it had no reason to be there just mash it up. Of course, they advertised this as the final film. They lied. 

So it feels like an insult even though we all suspected it. In this series of movies we all know that they are more supernatural than anything else with this maniacal killer who can’t die, but then to supposedly kill the character off so easily in the end and make us believe it is insulting as is the sequel which takes twists and turns when all along the series has seemed to be focused on Michael Myers going after and killing his family members and murdering anyone who gets in his way.

Though no answer is given to what happens after he achieves the goal or why. It is assumed he will be at peace. I just wonder then will he kill himself or go after distant relatives. Does he do investigations like a detective though his appearance will be sure to scare those in places where he can get paperwork and he has no interview technique to get testimonies. Does he have like a spidey sense to know where all his relatives are.

GRADE: C

KNIVES OUT (2019)

~ jbg ~ Leave a comment

knivesout1

 

Written & Directed By: Rian Johnson
Cinematography: Steve Yedlin
Editor: Bob Duscay 


Cast: Daniel Craig, Ana De Armas, Don Johnson, Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon, Lakeith Stanfield, Chris Evans, Noah Segan, Christopher Plummer, Toni Collette, Katherine Langford, Jaeden Martell, Frank Oz, Riki Lindhome, Edi Patterson, M. Emmet Walsh 


When renowned crime novelist Harlan Thrombey is found dead at his estate just after his 85th birthday, the inquisitive and debonair Detective Benoit Blanc is mysteriously enlisted to investigate. From Harlan’s dysfunctional family to his devoted staff, Blanc sifts through a web of red herrings and self-serving lies to uncover the truth behind Harlan’s untimely death.

Continue reading “KNIVES OUT (2019)” →