The adventures of Gustave H, a legendary concierge at a famous European hotel between the wars, and Zero Moustafa, the lobby boy who becomes his most trusted friend. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: Wes Anderson
Starring: Saoirse Ronan, Ralph Fiennes, Edward Norton and others
In a race against time, a crew of art historians and museum curators unite to recover renowned works of art stolen by Nazis before Hitler destroys them. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: George Clooney
Starring: George Clooney, Cate Blanchett, Matt Damon and others
In a race against time, a crew of art historians and museum curators unite to recover renowned works of art stolen by Nazis before Hitler destroys them. From: IMDb.com
Directed by: George Clooney
Starring: Matt Damon, George Clooney, Cate Blanchett and others
This is one of those movies that's good and enjoyable enough to watch
but it's lacking a certain amount of gravity of importance to truly
make a lasting impression as well.
Problem with its story is that it doesn't always feels balanced enough.
The story about FDR meeting up with King George VI would had been a
good and interesting enough one in itself but the way it tries to blend
in some drama and romance doesn't always works out too well for the
story. Instead, it often distracts from the seemingly more important
story elements and besides seem to be lacking the right required amount
of depth.
Due to the movie its more light and comical approach, it's hard to feel
involved with any of the drama anyway. It's not exactly the most
engaging movie but at the same time I'm also still glad the movie went
for a more light and comical approach, or else the movie might had been
an incredibly dry and slow one. Luckily the movie is indeed an
enjoyable one, so despite all criticism, it still remains a good enough
watch, all throughout.
The movie also definitely still gets uplifted by its performances. Bill
Murray is a great Roosevelt and he plays the role more straight than
you perhaps would expect. Yes, it's a comedy but Murray manages to play
the role with a straight face, while still at the same time making his
character a fun one. It's especially great to see all of the different
characters in this movie interacting with each other. I only did wish
it still got done in a somewhat more interesting and engaging way as
well at times, to give the movie some more gravity and credibility.
It's a good and fun enough movie but just not exactly one of the year's
must-sees!
(Review originally written at 8 November 2006) No I'm definitely not a Wes Anderson fan (even though I certainly get and understand his style) and I'll probably never become one. You'll either just hate his movies or just totally love it. I saw "Rushmore" and though I enjoyed it, I certainly did not loved it. "The Royal Tenenbaums" seemed like a more enjoyable and completely humor filled movie, so I decided to give it a chance. Just like "Rushmore" I enjoyed watching the movie but I wasn't always exactly fully amused and the movie did not always entertain- or was fun enough. The movie is filled with some eccentric, quirky over-the-top characters, set in a normal world. The characters are weird but they're certainly not funny. Not any of them is ever given something interesting or fun to do in this movie, which seems to be a waste, considering when looking at the cast of the movie. Ben Stiller is holding back and Bill Murray is given too little screen time to become an interesting or hilarious character. Guess that the movie also has way too many characters in it, which does begin to work distracting from each other after a while. The comedy and humor of Wes Anderson movies is always in its little and subtle things. Each sequences is carefully crafted and fully thought out. Every time you watch this movie you'll discover new fun small things set in the background or a small piece of dialog or character behavior. So I definitely understand and appreciate Anderson's style but yet I just don't enjoy it as much. Just not my type of movie and style of film-making. The entire movie is made in intro-style. So scene's rapidly follow each other and everything is build up and break down again in basically 5 minutes time. To me this is a very tiresome way of film-making that doesn't work amusing enough for me. It's good at first but it's starting to get old already after a while. Saving grace for me was Gene Hackman. He certainly added some style and power to the movie as the rude and not so subtle father of the family. In my opinion he also was the true main fun thing about the movie. Even more fun and hilarious than Bill Murray in the movie. I think that says something about the entire amusement level of the movie as a whole. In all honesty the movie did entertain me and this was mostly because of the little subtle things in the movie. As a whole, so with the characters, style and story included, the movie just didn't strike me as an perfectly amusing one. But most likely the Anderson fans shall not complain. 7/10 Watch trailer
This is a typical silly comedy from the early '80's. The movie is basically filled with numerous humorous situations and crazy characters, without ever really making an attempt to make things click to each other in the movie or letting it make sense. Sounds like an awfully simple and lame comedy and it's its core it actually of course is. Yet the movie works perfectly thanks to the superb comedy cast, who all are in great form.
Basically the movie follows three main plot lines, set on and around a golf course. First there is the caddy Danny Noonan (Michael O'Keefe) who tries to get a scholarship and deals with girl problems, among other things. Then there is Carl Spackler (Bill Murray) who has to hunt and kill a gopher that is ruining the green. And then there's the plot with Judge Elihu Smails (Ted Knight) and Al Czervik (Rodney Dangerfield), who are constantly battling each other, on and off the golf course. But in all fairness, those plot lines are just an excuse to introduce many eccentric characters and letting them do many crazy things. There actually are many subplots in the movie but this movie is all about its characters and comical situations.
It's obvious that they improvised a lot during this movie, with its characters, situations and dialog. Even if there was a complete script, it was abandoned multiple times throughout the movie. It's sort of part of the charm of "Caddyshack". Of course as always, especially Bill Murray does great in the improvised sequences.
The story often doesn't really make sense and it doesn't even try to do so. The movie is filled with totally pointless sequences that are only put in for the laughs, not for the story or the flow of it. Best example of this is the "Jaws" spoof sequence. The same goes for most of the characters. The movie doesn't try to make sense, so the gloves are of and there is no holding back. It provides the movie with some absolutely priceless humor and dialog at times.
The humor is totally crazy. It's over-the-top and at times also quite vulgar. Guess you have to appreciate the lame mindless and pointless humor of '70's and '80's movie to fully enjoy this movie.
The characters are really the reason why this comedy works as such an highly amusing and funny one. All of the characters are eccentric to put it mildly. It definitely helps that most of the characters are being played by very talented comedy actors. Normally I'm not a big Chevy Chase fan but in this movie he was just perfect. Bill Murray is crazy as always and perhaps in this movie even crazier than all of the other characters in this movie combined. Really amusing was also Rodney Dangerfield in a totally crazy and over-the-top role, with some great comical dialog from his character. He provides some of the biggest laughs of the movie.
