Followers

This Movie Guy Headline Animator

Showing posts with label 1994. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1994. Show all posts

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Movie Review: MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET

MIRACLE ON 34TH STREET
1994
PG


"If you can't believe, if you can't accept anything on faith, then you're doomed for a life dominated by doubt."
-- Kris Kringle


Miracle on 34th Street is a 1994 film directed by Les Mayfield that serves as a remake of the 1947 film of the same name. As the film opens, we see Dorey Walker (Elizabeth Perkins) trying to organize the Cole's Thanksgiving Day Parade. After finding that her current Santa Claus, a man named Tony Falacchi (Jack McGee), is inebriated, she finds a man off the street named Kris Kringle (Richard Attenborough) to step into the role. It soon becomes evident that Kris believes himself to be the one and true Santa Claus, much to the disbelief of most of the people around him. However, after a rival store company sets Kris into a plot to have him committed to a mental institution, all the Christmas hope that Kris may have brought to his friends may be a little bit lost. When he's brought to trial for his assault charges, the hearing soon turns into a debate over whether or not Kris is actually the real Santa as he claims himself to be.

Because there are so many Christmas stories that have seen multiple cinematic interpretations, it was only a matter of time that I would attempt a type of compare-and-contrast. While I could have easily gone with a couple of different versions of A Christmas Carol, considering there are so many adaptations, but I chose to use the two most famous versions of Miracle on 34th Street instead. As with any remake, there are bound to be similarities and differences galore, so this review may very well work best if you read it in connection with my review of the 1947 film as well.

The first thing I noticed about this particular adaptation is that it's definitely crafted on a grander scale, as is often the case with remakes. The film is longer than the original, and it just feels a little bit bigger. While I can understand the reasoning for making the film a little bit larger, I was rather fond of the minimalist approach taken by the 1947 film. Still, the largeness of this film isn't all that off-putting, and we actually get to see a grander side of New York in the late 20th-century. Everything is a little bit bigger and a little more colorful, and the Christmas season is alive and flourishing in the bustling streets. It does well to set the tone of the film.

As you can probably gather from the above synopsis of the film, we're basically getting the same storyline as the original movie. That being said, the screenplay is drastically different from the original. There are a few twists and turns that play out a little bit differently, and there are certain characters who receive more or less importance than before. One of the most glaring additions is the fact that we're seeing a legitimate love story between Dorey and her beau Bryan Bedford (Dylan McDermott). A lot of time is spent on their relationship this time around, while in the first film, it served as more of a footnote. In a way, it takes away from the film's core story, so I can't really say I was a fan of this particular subplot. We're also seeing more of an in-depth look at the opposing companies' attempts to sidetrack Cole's in this film. They even go as far as to spur Kris towards his ultimate legal issues, whereas Kris brought them on himself in the original picture. Most disappointing, however, is the fact that little Susan Walker (Mara Wilson) takes a complete back seat to the goings-on this time around. I thought the connection between Edmund Gwenn and Natalie Wood in the first film was one of the most successful bits, but Attenborough and Wilson is almost non-existent. These are just a few examples of the changes made for this remake. You're more than welcome to watch the two and compare them yourself.

The level of the performances is relatively solid, but it's nowhere near the greatness exhibited in this film's predecessor. Attenborough does good job, but he brings a little too me uch anger to ththe role of Kris Kringle. He plays right into the antagonists' claims that he could fly off the handle at any moment. There's just a little bit too much menace in this particular Kris Kringle. Perkins and McDermott do well, but their roles seem a little too forced, despite the fact that they're entirely likable in their own way. The film's best performance probably goes to Robert Prosky, who plays Judge Henry Harper, as you can see that he's actively having fun with his role. Like I said: the acting isn't bad; it's just a little too commonplace to be considered all that great.

Ultimately, Miracle on 34th Street falls down the wayside just like so many other remakes have before and since. It's so difficult to remake a classic and have it live up to the original, and in a way, it's a little unfair to compare the two. At the end of the day, this film is great holiday fare, even if it's a little ridiculous. There are a couple fantastic scenes - be on the lookout for Kris's conversation with a deaf girl in sign language and for the shots of the citizens showing their support for Santa - that really pull at your heartstrings, so this film is by no means a travesty. However, if you do need to choose between the two, I personally believe you should go with the original 1947 film.



Movie Review Summary
Grade: C+
1 Thumb Up

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Movie Review: FRANKENSTEIN

FRANKENSTEIN
1994
R



Frankenstein is a 1994 dramatic horror film directed by Kenneth Branagh, who also stars as the film's titular character. The film opens on a ship lost at sea as it nears the Arctic Circle. When it strikes an iceberg and runs aground, the ship's crew find a lone figure roaming among the ice. This man claims to be Viktor Frankenstein (Branagh), and he soon recounts the story of his coming to such a place. When he was younger, Viktor suffered the loss of his mother (Cherie Lunghi) and vowed to find a way to keep people alive for eternity. He goes away to school in order to study and develops a working relationship with Professor Waldman (John Cleese) who takes a liking Viktor's enthusiasm. When Waldman is murdered by a passing bum (Robert De Niro), Viktor decides to continue his unfulfilled work of creating life. He steals the corpse of the bum and places Waldman's brain inside of it. Through a sophisticated experiment, Viktor brings the creature to life with dire consequences. He believes it to be dead, but the creature escapes and hides in a countryside cottage. Armed with Viktor's personal journal, the creature learns to read and speak. When it learns that Viktor is responsible for his hideous condition, he vows to exact his revenge.

Branagh's vision of Mary Shelley's novel is not your standard "Frankenstein" fare. I haven't seem much in terms of Branagh's filmography - either acting or directing - but from what I've come to hear, he tends to place his own stamp on the work he adapts. That being said, I'm not quite sure the Frankenstein story was really the best story to try to make his own. For the most part, it sticks with the general story: Frankenstein has a desire to create life; he creates a creature from the parts of corpses; the creature is born and retaliates against its creator. The basic storyline is there. However, one of the biggest parts of the original story is that the creature is accidentally given an abnormal brain, thus leading it to acts of menace and mayhem. In this version, however, the creature is given the mind of an intellectual. Although he seems like nothing more than a brute just after his creation, he quickly learns the ways of men. In a way, Branagh humanizes the creature in very rapid fashion, and I'm not quite sure whether this is a good thing or not. If you look at the original 1931 film, the creature was simply a brute force of nature. It wasn't until the 1935 sequel (Bride of Frankenstein) that the creature began to accumulate a vocabulary and a personality, and the slow progression of character made the transformation more believable. In this version, I just couldn't find a way to believe it. On a separate note, I found the dialogue to be a little mundane and childish, and it's definitely not realistic. I was rolling my eyes at some of the lines.

Because the dialogue was so bad, it's hard to bash the actors entirely. Considering they're working with drivel, you kinda have to give them the benefit of the doubt... to an extent. Branagh hams it up to the best of his ability, delivering a series of over-the-top emotional scenes that really just made me want to laugh at him. That does not bode well for the dramatic lead of any film. Maybe he should've listened to his director's advice a little more often... Wait, nevermind. I forgot. Helena Bonham Carter plays Elizabeth, Viktor's adopted sister and ultimate wife - yes, wife - a relationship that makes for a few awkward scenes of affection. She's probably the most believable character in the film, but even she has a few moments where I was questioning why she chose to act in the way she did. I'd only heard good things about De Niro in the role of the creature, but I couldn't really see just why he'd been given any sort of accolade. He channels Boris Karloff a little bit, but he's nowhere near as good as he was back in the '30s. With the pounds of makeup he had to apply (the film nabbed an Oscar nom for makeup, by the way), there's really no room for De Niro to show any real emotion. It's not his fault. And I couldn't help but hear the De Niro of Scorsese flicks past come out in the creature here and there. I just couldn't get it in my head that De Niro could actually be this monster.

There's also never really a clear sense as to what genre this film actually falls under. You could consider it a dramatic film, but there's also some essences of horror (and the occasional bit of gore). Normally, this wouldn't really pose a problem for me, but with this particular film, I think there needed to be a set direction. They could've gone for the horror - De Niro's creature isn't all that pleasant to look at - and it could have been more effective. Or they could've gone straight drama, making the character development a little more believable. But as it stands now, it's a mix between the two, and Branagh frantically tries to give both genres their equal due within a mere two hours running time. He just throws too much on the screen in too short a time, and it gives the film a very manic and bouncing feel that generates more laughs than concern or fear.

I simply cannot recommend this film and feel okay about telling you to watch it. It's no NetFlix Instant Watch until this Saturday, so if you're lucky enough to have NetFlix and you REALLY want to waste two hours, now would be the time to do so. Otherwise, I'd say you should probably try to avoid this one. I have yet to find anything truly redeeming about it, and I'm not sure whether I'd ever be able to do so.

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: D-
2 Thumbs Down