- Joined: September 2005
- Post Count: 1,330
I really enjoy the biography genre, but everything I've read indicates that Amelia does nothing but recap the basic events of the subject's notoriety. That makes for a poor bio-film IMO. Interestingly even Ebert's review supports this, though he seems to applaud it.
At any rate, 18% on the tomato-meter is enough for me to pass.
"Because he's the hero that Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now... and so we'll hunt him... because he can take it... because he's not a hero... he's a silent guardian, a watchful protector... a DARK KNIGHT."
-
Robert Crawford
- Crawdaddy
-
- online
- Joined: December 1998
- Location: Michigan
- Post Count: 17,142
This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Amelia". Please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.
All HTF member film reviews of "Amelia" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Crawdaddy
G.W. McLintock: Camille, you're on your own.
- Joined: November 2004
- Post Count: 1,063
The three mains are given nothing to do. What a shame. I wanted something that could match my memories of "In Search of." I went in having read no reviews. I knew Swank was in it and I'd watch her in anything but this film sucks -- period.
There are two good scenes: When Earheart makes her pilot for the Atlantic flight get out of bed. The other is the Howland Island climax, although it builds to nothing.
Many Shubs and Zuuls knew what it meant to roast in the depths of the Sloar that day I can tell you.