Reviews

I just do not understand why anyone would feel the need to make a remake of a movie that was virtually flawless. One person commented that the majority of the American public had never seen the original Psycho on the big screen, and that this is a reason to do a remake. Why not just rerelease the original Psycho? I would LOVE to see the original on the big screen.

Anyway, back to the new version. I've only seen it once, when it first came out, so I've certainly forgotten quite a bit. The one scene that I do remember well is when Norman was peering through the hole in the wall at Marion undressing. The sound of him masturbating really took away from the scene, and was a perfect example of what is wrong in most movies today -- very little is simply left to the imagination. We KNOW that Norman is very aroused, but are sound effects really necessary?

The moral of the story is: You don't remake a Hitchcock

The Star Wars movies have always been some of my favorites. I find them very exciting, and the plot just seems to take me away, and makes me feel like I'm almost a character in the movie. Episode I, on the otherhand, could just not keep my attention. I actually (I swear to you I'm not making this up, lol) fell ASLEEP and missed the last half hour, so I had to pay another five bucks to see the whole thing again the last week, and found it even more boring then. This is only the second time in my life that I've fallen asleep at a movie theatre. The other time was when I was three, during some Disney movie. Some people are saying "this was just meant to introduce the characters..yadda yadda yadda". You don't spent two hours just introducing characters! I wouldn't say this movie was the worst of all time, considering that a lot of people seem to really like it (though I don't know how). I really hope Episode II is better.

Amazing cast, but somehow the movie is just a dud.

All of the humor is gone (well, what humor they try to inject is forced and not all funny), and there is just too much TALKING. The characters talk about every little feeling they have, as if the audience couldn't keep up otherwise. It makes this version quite dull.

All that said, the lead actors are amazing, despite the awful lines they have to deliver, so it's worth seeing once if you liked the original. Or if you just love Harrison Ford. ;)

I must admit that if the script had been better, I think Harrison Ford could have nailed the character of Linus and blown Humphrey Bogart out of the part. There was always something lacking in Bogey's performance in the original; his heart wasn't in it and you could really tell.

I first saw this film when I was eight years old, after receiving it as a first communion present from my mother. For months I watched the movie on an almost daily basis, and it was quickly a favorite. I thought it was absolute perfection.

Now that I am a bit older.. I notice that is does have quite a few flaws. It doesn't really capture the essence of Shaw's Pygmalion, but I don't think that should really take away from the movie; they should be treated as separate entities. Some of the sets are a little, well, cramped, but consider what they had to work with, they did a pretty good job.

And then there is the dubbing issue. I recently special on MFL on AMC, and they showed "Wouldn't It Be Loverly" and "Show Me" with Audrey's voice, and though Audrey may not have the perfect melodic voice of Marni Nixon, her voice was much more "Eliza". I really do think they should have just used her voice. If you watch "Funny Face", you get a good feel for voice, which I think is beautiful in a unconventional way.

Then, there is the question of whether Julie Andrews should have played Eliza in the film version of MFL. I've gone back and forth on this issue. Now, Audrey Hepburn is my favorite actress of all time, and Julie Andrews is a close runner-up, so it really is hard to "choose". Of course Julie's voice is much better than even Marni Nixon's... but like I said before, I don't think a perfect singing voice really would suit Eliza. And as for which would play a better Eliza overall.. I really don't know. I wasn't alive to see MFL on Broadway, so I really can't compare the two. What I do know is that Audrey gave an amazing performance. Anyway, as someone else said, if Julie had played Eliza, who would have played Mary Poppins? ;)

Such a lovely film! Leslie Caron is a doll, and though there is a part of me that would've loved to see Audrey Hepburn reprise her roll as Gigi after playing it on Broadway, I think Miss Caron did a fine job, and her authentic French accent is certainly a plus. She really does a great job of playing an impish teenager, impatiently waiting for her adult life to begin.

Maurice Chevalier, is, as always, a delight, and the songs are unforgettable.

Great coming of age story, told with a twist!

9/10