Moulin Rouge

[nrgbeat]

Has anyone seen the Nicole Kidman movie "Moulin Rouge"?



What did you think of it?

[NickNack]

Yes, and I thought it was excellent. As a matter of fact, I bought the DVD last week. When I had first rented the movie I was like, why am I even bothering? This is a musical... I hate musicals! Ten minutes later I was hooked. Unlike any musical I've seen before. I said it before that the director (Lurhman) should have been recognized at the Academy Awards.

[JussiK]

Have you checked out Luhrmann's STRICTLY BALLROOM ? The finale for that is an absolute must for any disco lover. I won't give away more but please please rent or better still buy a copy, you won't regret it. - You're so right, Nicky , Luhrmann should have won. To think he originally planned to stage the story in Studio 54...

[Nano]

Sorry, but for me it was just crap, and of the "seemingly endless" kind. The guy is smart, no doubt, but he tries too hard. I.e. the mixed songs. And there's a whole "horror vacui" design that make me choke at its baroqueness (hope this is well-spelled on my part).

You know, 5 minutes into the movie an Argentinian character falls through the floor. "There's something coming on this" I said to myself, because it was a Hollywood movie and in Hollywood movies all is there for a reason. And about an hour and a half later, when I was in between laughing and boring myself to death with the movie, I see this guy singing "Roxanne" as a TANGO!!! Of course, Luhrmann has to mix in another song (with no harmonic relation whatsoever) sung by Ewan McGregor... if not, it would have been "too simple" for him.

I wonder what Frenchies think about the "hommage" this movie does to Paris fin-de-siÈcle cabarets... Just look at the Toulouse-Lautrec character.

A vomit dressed in satin is still a vomit.

[markydefad]

"Moulin Rouge" was the one movie released last year that I could not wait to see. The trailers looked incredible--the lushness of the colors, costumes, sets, the use of kitschy pop music sounded and looked irresistible. So I paid my $9 bucks.



The movie started looking as gorgeous as the promos and then Nicole came in on that swing and it was deliriously wonderful for a few minutes and then the incessant cutting started to make me uneasy. I kept waiting for the movie to slow down a bit and let us into the characters, but it just kept going from buffonish low comedy schtick to rapid-fire cutting MTV style. Therefore, I never cared about the lovers and the opera style ending with Nicole spitting a tastefully designed stream of coughed up blood "Camille"-style seemed campy to me instead of touching.



The costumes, set design, and cinematography were outstanding and deserved Oscars. The use of pop songs was cute and fun, although they rarely sang a whole song through--just fragments of tunes.



My final reaction was "a fascinating failure". Someone has given me a tape, so maybe I should look at it again. I am not averse to seeing it again, although I rarely have a different reaction the second time around. But, I'm gonna give it another chance.



_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2002-04-04 16:30 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2002-04-04 16:41 ]</font>

[NickNack]

On 2002-04-01 05:05, JussiK wrote:

Have you checked out Luhrmann's STRICTLY BALLROOM ? The finale for that is an absolute must for any disco lover. I won't give away more but please please rent or better still buy a copy, you won't regret it. - You're so right, Nicky , Luhrmann should have won. To think he originally planned to stage the story in Studio 54...

Hi Jussi,



Long time...



I saw Strictly Ballroom for the first time on cable last year. Quickly became a favorite of mine. As a matter of fact, they had it on again this afternoon but it doesn't matter 'cause I'm gettin' the DVD.

[JussiK]

On 2002-04-04 16:05, Nano wrote:

"There's something coming on this" I said to myself, because it was a Hollywood movie and in Hollywood movies all is there for a reason.

That's the point really - MOULIN ROUGE isn't a real Hollywood film. That is also the reason the academy ignored Luhrmann's talents - too, threatening, too imaginative compared to the traditionals. So, the award goes to a mawkish film that distorts a true story in the time-honoured Hollywood fashion. So much for sincerety, art and progress in Los Angeles.

[Nano]

Jussik, I'm not against you liking the film, but are you serious about "Moulin Rouge" NOT being a Hollywood film?

Check this ingredients:

-a Hollywood star (Nicole Kidman);

-a Hollywood "hot male" (Ewan McGregor);

-a big studio financing the film and agreeing to shelve it for six months until it was finished;

-lots of spectacular visuals and camerawork;

-a script lighter than chewing gum.

I don't mention the director because, as you know, in true Hollywood directors doesn't count (i.e. The Empire Strikes Back). Of course Baz Luhrmann is not Ron Howard, but what matters here is not the size of your talents but how you use them.

Obviously not all independent films are of the Jarmusch-Solondz-La Bute type. They can be flashy and speedy. "Moulin Rouge" is full of image ideas, like Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" (one of my favorite movies of all time). And sure Nicole can act: she deserved an Oscar for "To die for". But if movie quality was measured just by the people involved, then movies like "The House of Spirits" or "Ishtar" would have won 20 Oscars, wouldn't they?

[JussiK]

In Hollywood directors don't count - there you have it in a nutshell. Baz Luhrmann commented that the film in question is basically still an Australian/British venture with a decidedly non-Hollywood mentality. Could Moulin Rouge be described as an auteur film...?