This weekend I was taken to 14th century England, a very CGI wonderland, and I drove a DeLorean. It was a very eventful weekend.
I decided to rent 'Robin Hood Prince of thieves' starring Kevin Costner, to compare it with the newly released 'Robin Hood' starring Russell Crowe. I have to ask first, Do you remember Disney's animated version of 'Robin Hood'? I would watch that film over and over again growing up. It was my #1. I recently rented it for Carson, but he wasn't too impressed. Anyways, Kevin Costner's 'RH' was similar to the animated version, which is one of the reasons I guess I liked it so much. I haven't seen the Costner version in many years, and now being older with a little bit more film knowledge, I still fell in love. Watching it made me realize many things, especially when comparing it with Russell's 'RH'. What every film needs, and what Costner's 'RH' had, was Morgan Freeman. Pairing Mr. Freeman ( he played Azeem the great one) as Costner's side kick was the best decision the Director and Producers could have made during the whole film. The whole film was perfectly casted. Costner and Freeman worked so well together, believable as true friends willing to die for one another and their beliefs. This is definitely what Russell's film was lacking, a true friendship, a true understanding of why the men stood by each other to fight. It really lacked the comradeship between Robin Hood and his men. Costner's film really showed the audience that Robin Hood and his men fought for a noble cause. Robin Hood was a little selfish, of course wanting more than anything to avenge his fathers death, but by the end of the film you saw it was to free his people, and for love. Russell's Robin Hood on the other hand was a man who walked in front of his men, the leader, with an 'you-do-what-I-say-and-I-will-ask-your-opinion-when-needed-but-I'll-never-need-it-cause-I-am-too-perfect' kinda attitude. I didn't understand why I did not like Russell's film when I first saw it, until I saw Costner's again. Now I understand perfectly, it was lacking the personal connection between Robin Hood and his men. 'Robin Hood Prince of Thieves,' Costner's film, receives an A.
Moving on, cause I go could write an essay on the comparison of those two films.
After leaving Sherwood Forest, I found myself falling down a hole into Wonderland. I must be honest and tell you that I decided to rent this because Johnny Depp played the Mad Hatter in the film. I guess also because anything Tim Burton does is pretty imaginative and impressive. As I began to watch the film I realized I should have done some research before hand. A little spoiler here, but the film is a sequel. A sequel to the Animated version I guess, because it was stated over and over again in the film that Alice had been there before when she was younger, even showing flashbacks including painting the roses red. So, this was a sequel, and I did not like it too much. I did like the cast. It was almost a tribute to Alan Rickman weekend. He plays the Sheriff in 'Robin Hood: p.o.t.' and the Caterpillar in Wonderland. Depp's Hatter was kinda creepy, even more so than his usual characters. I enjoyed the actress who played Alice, Mia Wasikowska. I had not seen her in anything else before this. The film was perfectly casted, but I did not enjoy the plot and was bored, but it was visually entertaining, even so I give the film a C.
Finally, I joined Michael J. Fox in 'Back to the Future III.' The one with cowboy boots and gun fights, and though this final chapter of the films is not as enjoyable as the first 'Back to the Furture,' it was still pretty entertaining. Just the idea alone to be able to travel through time. It is the same feeling as if you were to watch 'Peggy Sue Got Married.' Or even 'Mr. Destiny.' We all have something we wish we could do over, or go back and change. So, I think that alone are reasons why people enjoy films such as 'Back to the Future.' What can I give this film but an A. Back before movies were competing to see who could create the most CGI scenes, 'Back to the Future' was the real thing. Those were real flames at the end of the movie lighting up the street from the DeLorean. That's when I think film sets must have been real exciting. Though cheesy, 80's films were still great and super creative without CGI, and 'Back to The Future' is proof. The 80's weren't so bad after all. Thanks Mr. Spielberg!
No comments:
Post a Comment