'THE MAJESTIC'. Outstanding film! (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Having loved Frank Darabont's first two films The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile, I knew I would love this movie as soon as I saw the trailer for it a few months back, but I didn't make it to the theater to see it unfortunatly.
I finally saw it last night, and think it's one of the best films of last year(or is it this year)?
I am utterly dumbfounded at the fact that this film did not do well, particularly with the ctitics! I don't know what is up with moviegoers and critics now, but they just don't know what they're missing! :frowning: Are they so overdosed on thrill rides like Spider-man and SW EP II that they can't slow down enough, or have the patience enough to appreciate a wonderful film like this?
I loved both of those films(SM & SW EP II), but that's not all there is. I like to be made to feel good in a film once in awhile, to be touched by magic. This film delivered that for me.
This truly is a film worthy of Frank Capra and Jimmy Stewart IMO, and I was very happy to see that Roger Ebert agreed with that sentiment. A cynical mind will be blind to the films charms which, I think, is the problem many critics had. They asked too many questions, and did not open themselves up to the experience. Sad.
I fear that this jaded attitude will spell the downfall of films like this if it keeps up.
I just want to say to Warner, Castle Rock, and EVERY studio for that matter, please don't stop making films like The Majestic based on it's box office performance! We need more movies like it as they capture the golden age of Hollywood, before the likes of Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay drained the soul from it by substituting heart and drama, with explosions and violence.
Congrats to Frank Darabont, Jim Carrey, and everyone else involved with it. 5 :star:'s out of 5 :star:'s for The Majestic.

 

[Nick Sievers]

It wasn't robbed of an Oscar nomination was it? I'm kidding of course, John
I wanted to see this, and it was advertised to come out in my city a month or so ago and it never showed up - I guess i'll have to wait until it hits DVD to make an opinion. I'm a fan of Carrey and I liked Shawshank Redemption - so it already had my interest before the critics ripped it in half.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

quote...
"It wasn't robbed of an Oscar nomination was it?"
Well, now that you mention it...

 

[Robert G]

Completely agree. What a great film. My wife and I thoroughly enjoyed this one. Thanks to Ron for his review, otherwise I probably would have never watched it.

 

[Patrick Sun]

FYI: there were a couple of threads here in the past specifically focused on the Majestic:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...light=majestic
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...light=majestic

 

[Holadem]

Never saw it because I got the impression it would be a little too schamltzy for my taste. Sweeping music with tear running down the cheek kinda movie.

--
Holadem

 

[Malcolm R]

I guess i'll have to wait until it hits DVD to make an opinion.

It's been out for a couple of weeks.

 

[Nick Sievers]

I'm from Australia, Malcolm. I don't think I would go and buy this one unseen.

 

[Julian Lalor]

Can Darabont make a movie that runs for less than 140 minutes? If ever a film was unecessarily bloated, it's The Majestic. I was a moderate fan of Shawshank Redemption (although its origins as a King story were all to painfully apparent in the lack of character depth) and thought Green Mile an improvement over that film, except again the film was weighed down by its hideous length. The Majestic, however, has me despairing that Darabont understands anything about pacing.

The film certainly tried for "Capraesque" but that is its major problem. Capra's films belong to another era and, perhaps, an era of better filmmaking, although I always found his more "serious" films (eg Deeds and Washington) somewhat condescending to the audience. Its saving grace was Carrey, who, although hoplessly miscast in this role, reveals himself to the be dramatic actor he wanted to be in Man in the Moon. To me, the film is an odd failure. And no, I don't think we'll be seeing the Studios trying for more of these sorts of films.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Julian,
what exactly does a films running time have to do with anything? If a film is great, like this one is, the time just flies by.
This is what i'm saying here, over analyzing a film into the ground until all life is drained from it. Why can't people just forget all that crap and let the film take you where it wants to take you? Your entitled to your opinion of course, it's just that my point is too many critics and movie goers nowdays are far too cynical. So much in fact that they can't even spot an outstanding piece of great filmmaking when it's right in front of them because they're too busy going through some ridiculous checklist to see if the film matches some criteria that they have. Like the film has some hidden agenda, or is conspiring to trick them on some level or something.
It's just telling us a story, that's it. Don't ask so many questions, just watch.
Just curious, but why exactly do you state that Carrey was miscast? Is it Carrey himself that just rubs you the wrong way? He reminded me so much of Jimmy Stewart it's not even funny, and he nailed the role. That's perfect casting in my book.
Julian,
don't feel as if i'm coming down on you because of your opinion on the film, i'm just trying to understand why films are so over analyzed these days is all.
quote...
"And no, I don't think we'll be seeing the Studios trying for more of these sorts of films."
:frowning: I find that statement to be heartbreaking in the most extreme sense of the word! :frowning::frowning:
I don't get it. People here bitch and moan all the time about how Hollywood only does mindless sequels and retreads the same crap over and over, but then when a film like this comes along it is completely shunned.

 

[Jonathan_]

I thought that the running time on this movie was just right. The movie never rushed, but at the same time I never felt that it dragged. One of my favs from last year.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

It wasn't robbed of an Oscar nomination was it?

I thought of the same thing. I think John is getting a reputation as the man who cried "ROBBED!"
~Edwin

 

[Lou Sytsma]

John based on your review and others - plus the fact that I love Shawshank Redemption and really like The Green Mile - I'll have to give this one a rent.

Not being a big Jim Carrey fan I had decided to pass on this one.

I'll let you know what I think.

 

[Michael Reuben]

I don't get it. People here bitch and moan all the time about how Hollywood only does mindless sequels and retreads the same crap over and over, but then when a film like this comes along it is completely shunned.

In fairness, the discussion in this thread indicates that a "retread" is exactly what The Majestic is -- of a Jimmy Stewart/Frank Capra movie. When it was over, I felt vaguely dissatisfied because it didn't have the conviction or credibility of its "original", despite some good performances and first-rate production values.

Re: the length. I've always thought that Darabont earned his long running times by packing them with genuine drama, usually generated by a central character who evolves into something completely different than what he began as (Red in Shawshank, Nolan in Green Mile). That element is utterly missing in Majestic. Carrey's character lives two different lives -- there's even an explicit speech about this -- and he doesn't change that much within either one. He's a blank slate when his memory is gone; he's a Hollywood hack when it's there. The only real change comes at the point where the two lives are stitched awkwardly together during the testimony at the end. It feels forced, unearned, and it comes too late to save the movie.

IMO, the critics were overly harsh, but the film certainly wasn't robbed of awards or accolades. It's nice, though, that it seems to be finding an audience on video.

M.

 

[BobV]

It feels forced, unearned, and it comes too late to save the movie.

Of course it's forced... it's very true to life. People don't change when they don't have to, they change when there is a circumstance that comes upon us that makes have to finally say, "ok, this is it, this is where I will take my experiences of the last while, make my decision, and change my actions and attitudes." I find it very rarely possible that I (or anyone) would have a total external turnabout in character gradually. It happens during one of those 'epiphanal moments' (to coin a term ). This is exactly the reason why I believe it is earned. He's gone through an experience which can jolt him, he's lived through another's eyes for some time, able to see the world from his perspective and when he gets his old life back, the experience of this previous 'gift' allows him the conviction to change, not in an unrealistically gradual way, but in one swell foop (is that a word) after debating and wrestling with the values in his own mind.
Excellent story that drew me in and entertained thoroughly.

 

[Jay W]

I'm not sure about Oscar nominations , but I really enjoyed the film for what it was worth. I thought it did exactly what it set out to do (which may not be to everyone's liking) and recreated the atmosphere of the time perfectly.

 

[Michael Reuben]

it's very true to life

Amnesia? Please. That kind of "experience life through another's eyes" amnesia only happens in the movies.

M.

 

[Ushabye]

I eat up schamltz as much as the next guy and have been moved to tears more times than I would admit, but I just couldn't swollow this picture at all. It just layed it on like mollassis.

*SPOILER BELOW*


When Martin Landau keeled over in the projection booth and missed the reel change...I had my head in my hands. And the only reason I didn't leave the cinema out of sheer embarassment during his following death bed scene was that I was being paid to be there as I'm a projectionist and was checking the reels.

I think this story probably read well as a screenplay, but translated to film I just found it too glossy and ultimately shallow.

In the pantheon of Legend Of Bagger Vance methinks.

 

[Charles J P]

I just picked up this movie and my fiance and I both loved it which is very rare. I guess I am the king of schmaltz, because I actually wanted him to be Luke. I wanted him to have amnesia from the war, and then came back and fell into a hollywood job, and then just happened to get amnesia in his hometown. Hows that for schmaltzy. At least I could get a job at Disney. Anyway, at least Roger Ebert agrees with me.

 

[BobV]

it's very true to life. People don't change when they don't have to they change when there is a circumstance that comes upon us that makes us...

You had said "The only real change comes at the point where the two lives are stitched awkwardly together during the testimony at the end. It feels forced, unearned..." and I was responding to that.