Main      Site Guide    
Message Forum
Re: Moulin Rouge. Pearl Harbor. Two Weeks Later.
Posted By: Howard, on host 209.86.36.21
Date: Sunday, June 10, 2001, at 06:54:57
In Reply To: Moulin Rouge. Pearl Harbor. Two Weeks Later. posted by Sam on Saturday, June 9, 2001, at 15:51:51:

> Since writing this post over two weeks ago, which was more about what messages should be sent to Hollywood rather than a critique of movies I have not seen, I am now 50% capable of speaking directly about the quality of the films under discussion.
>
> Moulin Rouge is only a "musical" by definition. It is nothing like what other films come to mind when one uses the term. I have never seen a movie that looks anything like this one. There is more energy in this than most action movies, more color than Shakespeare In Love, and zaniness that would make Terry Gilliam proud. The age old story is as gleefully stereotypical as Dudley Do-Right, and yet the emotions are real. Few movies are quite as heartbreaking, and fewer still are fun just the same.
>
> Before I recommended that this movie be supported to send a message to Hollywood that musicals should not be a dead genre. Now I have one very important additional reason to support it: It's *good*.


I still like a good musical. Many of the really great singers and dancers are gone, but new ones are beginning to show up to take their place.
I think I saw the original Molin Rouge crica 1953, but I never listed it as a favorite. However, I may see the new one.

As for Pearl Harbor, I've been there.(1988) I vividly remember when it happened, and I've seen that day portrayed in a number movies, but I may not see this one. It's too long, and besides, my 12 year-old grandson said it was a girl movie.
Howard