Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

19825Re: Enchanted

Expand Messages
  • dbratman1
    Jun 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Lynn Maudlin" <lynnmaudlin@...> wrote:
      >
      > This is where philosophically we have very different relationships
      > with film: I don't expect perfection

      Foo - I don't _expect_ perfection either. But Enchanted didn't even
      reach basic enjoyability, predisposed though I was to like it. The
      point of Shrek's perfection is to demonstrate that it's possible, and
      all the more reason to dismiss excuses for bad movies on the lines of
      "they did the best they can" or "nothing's perfect."

      > But I'm surprised you find _Shrek_ 'perfect' when you're bothered by
      > the critters cleaning the NYC apartment scene; the gross-out opening
      > sequence of _Shrek_ was so off-putting to me (and bear in mind my
      > predisposition to LIKE movies) that I wasn't able to engage and enjoy
      > until about halfway through the film. Happily this is easily solved
      > with the DVD: I simply start the movie a chapter in.

      Not to respond to your problems with the opening credits of Shrek, but
      just to explain the difference:

      1) Shrek is animated; Enchanted isn't. Big, big difference in what
      I'll tolerate. Animated street-rats and bugs are cute (I wasn't
      bothered by Ratatouille, though others were), but CGI or real ones
      aren't. I discovered this difference when watching Who Framed Roger
      Rabbit. Cartoon characters getting pummeled and mauled in Toontown
      was funny; having it happen to Bob Hoskins on his visit there was not.

      2) I was a little put off by the Shrek credits on first watching, but
      the spirit of the rest of the film retroactively cast its charm even
      over that. Amy Adams has a little spunk, but otherwise Enchanted is
      utterly devoid of charm.
    • Show all 18 messages in this topic