Rating: 
Summary: JONATHAN RHYS MEYERS STRIKES GOLD AGAIN!!
Review: I think Jonathan Rhys Meyers is DEFINITELY one of the most underrated actors today. I think due to our general dislike in the US for "art house" and "independent" films and our own (and yes I am a Christian) Christian morality in USA that we shy away from films that aren't cast in wide release (Yet another disappointing thing that if you don't live in NY or LA you miss tons of GREAT films) and we miss very fabulous stars and fabulous and interesting roles and performances. So, Jonathan got his start starring in "Velvet Goldmine" with Ewan McGregor who is a great actor also BUT due to the timing of the Star Wars episode etc HE got top billing when it was really JONATHAN doing all the heavy lifting so to speak. I love John Malkovich since his eyes are so expressive and for the first time I was able to see Jonathan doing that in this role. There was one pivotal scene when he warred with Bruce Greenwood with his eyes and Greenwood tried very hard to do the same but with zero impact. So, I HIGHLY recommend it for those of you looking to get behind a great new actor.
Rating: 
Summary: A spectacularly bad movie
Review: I was extremely disappointed in this film. The opening's magical dance in the snow accompanied by tinkling music was promising; however, that was to be the best part.
Bruce Greenwood was refined and Uncle George was delightful, but the others seemed miscast or were stultifyingly wooden. I did not find Madeline Stowe's portray of Isabel tragic; I found it pathetic, and I couldn't stand watching her -- especially the closeups of her myopic, insipid, lovelorn gaze. But watching Johnathan Rhys-Meyers was the worst of all, with his bombastic speech and amazingly bad American accent. So much more could have been done with Georgie's part and, while I feel Mr. Rhys-Meyers has great potential to play a sniveling boob that one loves to hate, he missed the mark for me.
While Gretchen Mol's performance wasn't bad, I hated her character just for the simple fact that she was charmed by Georgie. Jennifer Tilly was far too shrill and her rumermongering was less cunning than unconvincingly desperate. Her fake tears and tantrums were an embarrassment. I am a fan of Ms. Tilly (she was fantastic in "The Women") and feel that much more could have been done with her character.
All I can say is that I am so glad I borrowed this film from my library before buying it, because I would have immediately turned around and sold it.
Rating: 
Summary: Somewhat disappointig
Review: I was rather looking forward to this adaptation, and even went so far as to order the book as soon as I heard about it. I must say I was somewhat disappointed witht he final product. Most of the characters seem forced or flat (particularly Isabel and Fanny, not to mention Georgie) and the colors are rather flat throughout. I do have to give it three stars because the story is still engaging (I especially recommend the book- I'm surprised the author isn't more widely known), and after all, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers isn't too hard on the eyes. But it could have been better. I don't know whether it was the actors or the director (the script is practically straight from the book, with a few adjustments). So maybe see if you can catch it on A&E again before springing for the DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: If you were hoping for "The Magnificent Ambersons" that should have been, way back when, it didn't happen here. This version of the Magnificent Ambersons had the advantage of Orson Welles orignial script, but unfortunately not his direction. The tone is never really set. Even without reading the interviews in which Stowe (Isabelle) gives Arau negative reviews you can see she is lost.Gretchen Mol (Lucy), and William Hootkins (Uncle George) come out best. Bruce Greenwood (Eugene) has his moments. I normally like Jennifer Tilly (Fanny) but she was overwrought and all wrong here. Jonathan Rhys Meyers seems out of his depth. He's so glaring, huffy, and self aggrandizing that you can't see why Lucy would fall for him. I hope we do not have to wait another 60 years for a better attempt.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: If you were hoping for "The Magnificent Ambersons" that should have been, way back when, it didn't happen here. This version of the Magnificent Ambersons had the advantage of Orson Welles orignial script, but unfortunately not his direction. The tone is never really set. Even without reading the interviews in which Stowe (Isabelle) gives Arau negative reviews you can see she is lost. Gretchen Mol (Lucy), and William Hootkins (Uncle George) come out best. Bruce Greenwood (Eugene) has his moments. I normally like Jennifer Tilly (Fanny) but she was overwrought and all wrong here. Jonathan Rhys Meyers seems out of his depth. He's so glaring, huffy, and self aggrandizing that you can't see why Lucy would fall for him. I hope we do not have to wait another 60 years for a better attempt.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating misfire
Review: In response to some of the other reviews, I will add that for the first time I did understand why Lucy (the radiant and intelligent Gretchen Mol) would be attracted to Georgie Minafer. Rhys-Meyers is handsome and passionate (if almost always wrong-headed), as opposed to the doughy, wooden George of Tim Holt in the original. The casting of Jennifer Tilly was a brave experiment: Aunt Fanny as a voluptuous, well-fed kitten of a woman rather than the spare, bird-like Fanny of (the superlative) Agnes Moorehead. Unfortunately, the director betrays her at every turn, especially in the wrestling matches in which she's obliged to engage with her nephew. I found Bruce Greenwood fairly pallid and uninvolving, though his last letter to his "true love" (the beautiful Madeleine Stowe, who was amazingly convincing as the very young Isabelle) did move me to tears. This film is quite an accomplishment, if also heart-breakingly misguided at times. (This review is based on a viewing of the film as broadcast on cable).
Rating: 
Summary: Finally a coherent movie version of Tarkington
Review: Let's face it; Orson Welles's movie of The Magnificent Ambersons is a magnificent mess through no fault of its highly regarded director. Cut and edited to pieces by studio hacks (Robert Wise!!!) with the excised material now lost, the movie exists as a mere torso rather than a whole experience. So much is missing, that the movie is hard to follow unless you've read the book. The movie is certainly not what Welles wanted and it is unrepairable; a great tragedy in film history.
The new version from A&E may not have Welles's unique directorial ability or atmospheric lighting in black and white, but it does tell Tarkington's story coherently and on the whole, quite successfully. Director Alfonso Arau has purposely avoided the look of the Welles film, opting for a rich, epic color palette. The art direction is beautiful and you really get a flavor of turn of the century midwest American life.
Many reviewers have complained of Jonathan Rhys-Meyers performance of George. Frankly it is a brave and quite accurate portrayal. Tim Holt in the Welles film was hopelessly too mature looking to play Tarkington's headstrong brat. Georgie is not a very sympathetic character in the book and Rhys-Meyers studiously avoids turning him into the bland leading man that Welles allowed Holt to portray. Those that take issue with Rhys-Meyers don't know the book. He is the right age and certainly the right look for this difficult character. He is a dynamic actor that isn't afraid to be true to a character's inate nature. He's not easy to take at times, but Georgie isn't either!
Many have also criticized Jennifer Tilly's Fanny as not being the equal of Agnes Moorehead. Again, Tilly is closer to the book. Fanny is a hapless character which Tilly invests with a wonderful degree of humanity coupled with her unique brand of eccentricity. Moorehead had not an ounce of charm and frankly was miscast. Madeleine Stowe, James Cromwell, and Bruce Greenwood are all excellent as are the supporting players.
Is this the ultimate version of this classic. Of course not. It is, however, a well made, BBC style television movie that is very true to Tarkington's novel and tells the story clearly, unapologetically and with some amount of panache. I give it an enthusiastic recommendation.
Rating: 
Summary: Not quite magnificent
Review: Much ado is made about the dual ending of classic film "The Magnificent Ambersons," which was originally made by Orson Welles. The remake is more or less faithful to the original material, but some bad casting (Jennifer Tilly is the worst example), weird scripting, and a rather ambiguous tone scratch it up.
George (Jonathan Rhys-Meyers) is the youngest member of the rich Amberson family, including his grandfather, mother, uncle and aunt. He's been raised as a prince, and he acts like one too -- spoiled and imperious. He falls in love with the beautiful Lucy (Gretchen Mol), the daughter of automobile innovator Eugene (Bruce Greenwood). Unfortunately, Eugene has always been in love with George's mother Isabel (Madeleine Stowe).
Jealous and disapproving of the "new money" people, George sets out to wreck the budding relationship between his mother and Eugene. He succeeds -- but at the cost of his own relationship with Lucy. Still imperious, George continues on his way without knowing that the growing urban sprawl marks the decline of the Amberson family into poverty...
It's always interesting to see how society changed in the past, as it does here and "The Forsyte Saga." And that's actually the most interesting part of "Magnificent Ambersons," not the family saga. Unfortunately, we only get an occasional glimpse of this. The rest of the time, it's merely more of George's tedious tantrums, and his family worrying about money and relationships.
Alfonso Arau seems to have been sleeping during the production of this -- he adds a sparkling grandeur to the early scenes. But the color fades quickly; pretty soon it's just a slow decline, with little to hold your interest. The only thing he adds to the production is an emphasis on the incestuous feelings between Isabel and George. It's icky, and feels like it was just pasted in.
Jonathan Rhys-Meyers is a good actor, but only in the last eighth of the movie do we develop any liking or understanding of his character. Greenwood is fairly good, and Stowe is a convincing wilting lily, although she doesn't do much else. Gretchen Mol brightens every scene she's in, and William Hootkins (as hearty Uncle George) is a lovable teddy, but Jennifer Tilly ruins every scene she's in with a screechy, over-the-top performance.
It's interesting to see the decline of the old-money dynasties in favor of the "riffraff." But the hit-and-miss casting and lackluster direction makes "The Magnificent Ambersons" almost as tedious as Rhys-Meyers' tantrums.
Rating:
Summary: its diffrent in a good way
Review: ok so its nothing special but it is worth a look and for the price its worth buying.it has every thing a good movie should have a goode looking cast good acting and a great story line however the movie could have been much better.
its about a ypung man is is very well of and how he disrespects people because of his wealth.but after his mother takes ill the tables are turned and now he is the poor one who has to find a job and support him self with no help from his former ftriends or family. it also a sorth of c0oming of age and the changing of the world the story is set in the early 1900 s
Rating:
Summary: its diffrent in a good way
Review: ok so its nothing special but it is worth a look and for the price its worth buying.it has every thing a good movie should have a goode looking cast good acting and a great story line however the movie could have been much better.
its about a ypung man is is very well of and how he disrespects people because of his wealth.but after his mother takes ill the tables are turned and now he is the poor one who has to find a job and support him self with no help from his former ftriends or family. it also a sorth of c0oming of age and the changing of the world the story is set in the early 1900 s
|
