Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies' started by Radioman970, Mar 30, 2007.
I hope it's good. I still need to see MorrorMask.
Also one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. A great story that flowed very well. I just came back from buying two of Neil's books. This is one of the first times that seeing a movie has driven me to buy a book.
I thought that De Niro was great. Don't remember ever seeing him in such a vulnerable role. William Shake Spear is a great character
Yes, yes you certainly do need.
"How about a riddle?"
"If you've got it you want to share it, but if you share it you haven't got it"
"Come on, I'm in a hurry."
"Alright, whats the answer?"
"Its a secret."
"Yes I know that, but whats the answer?"
"Its a secret!"
[points in other direction]
"Look! An Idiot!"
I saw the movie today, and Stardust was so magical and romantic that after the movie I had to go and look for everything Stardust. I was trying to find the soundtrack and graphic novel but I only found the novel. Did preordered the soundtrack through Amazon, says it will be available in September. The graphic novel, I'm trying to find the hard cover.
I have to admit I fell in love with Claire Danes. De Niro was great. Stardust is a movie you can watch over and over again. I can't wait to see it again. For me it was the best movie of Summer 2007.
This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Stardust". Please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.
All HTF member film reviews of "Stardust" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Is this a quote from the film? I thought it was more serious.
Oh no, its quite the cute lil' movie.
That quote is from MirrorMask, which IMO was not nearly as good as Stardust (not to say it was bad). Stardust has continued to grow on me the more I think back on it. It was to me a much more serious-toned film than The Princess Bride. Based on early stills and even the previews, I was not sold on Charlie Cox as the main character. After the movie, he totally worked for me.
This, along with Sunshine, has got me really considering picking up a PS3.
Lovely movie. The Gaiman novel was a light and frothy work, especially compared to his a bit more heavier material in "American Gods" or the slightly darker "Neverwhere" (still my favorite book by Neil).
Any Gervais fans? I have to wonder if his one line to De Niro "Are you having a laugh?" was thrown in by him as a nod to his excellent show from HBO, "Extras." When I heard that, I giggled and instantly thought of his show. Only sad thing about Gervais and his role was that most of his performance was shown in the trailer. The negotiation scene, his longest bit, was also in a Gaiman interview on NPR so by the time I saw the movie, I had pretty much seen or heard his entire performance. Still, a good cameo.
I read somewhere that Daine's accent was horrible but it sounded, if not perfect, at least pretty consistent.
Thoroughly enjoyed this. Went into this having only seen the trailer and at first I was worried it was going to be another Eragon. Thankfully, the script and performances lift this film to a much higher level. It felt like it has been edited a little, especially at the start, as some initial early scenes seemed to be rushed. But this soon passed.
Great performance from Michelle Pfeiffer who I havent seen in a while and also De Niro.
1/2 out of
Sounds like a great movie. I will have to check it out this weekend.
There is an article talking about summer movies losing money.
This is what they said about Stardust...
Then, there's Stardust, the just released Paramount (VIA) fantasy film that stars Robert DeNiro as a cross-dressing pirate who roams the sky in search of lightning (don't ask) and Michelle Pfeiffer as a super-evil witch queen. The film is also Hollywood at its worst: Sign on a bunch of big names, give them a totally incomprehensible script, and expect moviegoers to figure it out. Well, that didn't happen either. And the film, made for somewhere north of $70 million, is DOA with less than $20 million in ticket sales. Who green-lights this stuff? At least Paramount was smart enough to spread the risk among other investors, so they will share the loss.
Yeah, they said the same thing about The Princess Bride when it came out (which grossed $30 mil).
For the record, Stardust is getting rave reviews over at rotten tomatoes. 74% fresh in fact. Most critics are calling it the most fun and original flick of the summer.
We'll see how it does on DVD. It could look really great in HD DVD.
That's an absurd critique. Stardust is in no way incomprehensible. In fact, one of the nice things about it is how simple and straightforward the movie is.
David Poland had an interesting take on Stardust several weeks back. IIRC, the movie was heavily financed by foreign backers with an eye for the international market (and presumably the casting is more appealing internationally). Evidently Perfume was made with the same mindset and it did rather well overseas even though it never made any impact in the US. But Poland also pointed out that Perfume was released overseas before hitting in the US and it's the reverse for Stardust. It's possible that already being perceived as a financial failure in the US could hurt Stardust's foreign box office prospects.
Oh...you can see I'm clueless. One day I see myself leaving the store with a small stack of DVDs, Mirrormask on top, then Pan's Labyrinth and Stardust (when it comes out) on the bottom. (EDIT: And Bridge to Teribithia )
Oh! And a smile on my face. I'm glad we're getting some quality fantasy films after LotR. If only we could get The Hobbit.
Wife and I both really enjoyed this movie. Its not at all hard to follow, the visual effects were great but not overdone, and the flow of the story was wonderful.
While most movies you might figure out whats going to happen before it does, the movie just goes on for several minutes prolonging the moment you know is coming up. Stardust didn't do that, you knew what was coming up and several times it just happens, then the story continues on.
Trying to hold off seeing it again until it comes out on DVD.
The idiot that wrote that article, Ronald Grover, is rightly being excoriated in its comments. I would guess he's in favor of sequels, even when they suck, knowing that the audience pays before they see the movie, not after. (Imagine if the studios had to make a living on tips.) This is the McDonald's-ization of the movies, and unfortunately, too many movie-goers are playing into it.
Stardust had its own tone and take on the genre, and that's a good thing; I like seeing new stuff. It was certainly easy enough to follow, and it was a fun movie. I can't compare it to the big money-makers like Pirates 3 or Shrek 3, because after the mediocre reviews they got, and especially after how bad Pirates 2 was, I did not go see them.
I can and it was better than all of them combined as well as Spiderman 3 and Transformers After some extremely mediocre sequels, with only a couple being worth seeing IMO (Harry Potter, Bourne Ultimatum), this film deserved much better.
I just got back from seeing Stardust and IMHO it's the most delightful surprise of the year, and the most entertaining film of the summer. I was captivated from beginning to end. Everything worked for me - the story, the cast, the direction, the effects, the cinematography, the music, and the wonderful narration by our favorite wizard, which sets the perfect opening & closing tone for the movie.
I was also pleased that the 1 PM showing I attended was nearly full - hopefully a sign that word of mouth is working for this gem. I plan on seeing it again next weekend with new folks.
That had to be intentional. There was a small (but vocal) portion of the audience at my screening that laughed out loud at that point (including myself - I just finished the 2nd series of "Extras" a few days ago). I'm sure De Niro did his "Extras" cameo while he was in England filming Stardust.
Absolutely fantastic movie! One of my favorites of the year, by far! It's really a shame it probably won't make much money, as it stands now...
Vaughan is an incredibly talented filmmaker. There's an impressive and consistent whimsical flow to his work here, which contrasts sharply with the gritty feel of "Layer Cake". The music, editing, effects, cinematography and staging display superb craftsmanship (many great scenes that - while contributing to the whole narrative - also come off as superb stand alone set-pieces. Similar to chapters in a novel - which of course, they were).
Pfeiffer is a great villainess. And still a beautiful screen presence after all these years (well not with the make-up and prosthetics )
I got as much of a Terry Gilliam tone as "The Princess Bride". It's probably the merry, surreal sights that just sporadically (seemingly episodically) enter the film's narrative.
De Niro's character was hilarious. This time he is not the straight man in a comedic dynamic/set-up, and it plays great.
Yeah, it's one of those movies.
I predict many folks will watch this at home and kick themselves for not seeing it at the theater.