| Title |
Commentary | ||
Casanova |
Dan |
Terri |
|
| |
. . . We made it about 30-40 minutes into this movie and then walked out, bored stiff. . . . I was substantially lost within the first two minutes when some preposterous things happened in terms of physics. Yet, we stuck with it for a while to see if it either a. regained its ground or b. became enough of a farse, or fantasy to appeal to us on that basis. . . . It did neither. I define pornography as whenever sex is overlaid gratuitously into a plot, where it doesn't fit or advance the storyline in any significant way. So, I found this film pornographic, but since it didn't involve nudity or graphic sexual portrayals we'll call it soft porn. . . . Add to that that it didn't appeal to me, the male member of the review team, but Terri could see what they were driving at, I'd further narrow its definition to "soft porn for women." The plot, as well as the fictive scenario, was absurd. . . . So, it's a resounding thumbs down for me! But, I will give it a C+ anyway. Why is that? Some of the acting was first rate--case in point Jeremy Irons. And the scenes of Venice were in many ways breathtaking. . . . My best advice: unless you're a woman looking for an evening of soft porn, stay home and wait for it to come out on TV. . . .How would you rate this review? Use links below to navigate to other pages. |
. . . It was a stupid, silly movie and not for me. . . . ."Who was it for then?" I asked. . . . .. "It was for women, so they could see the world the way they'd like to have it, where men are concerned." . . . Thumbs down for Terri.
Use links below to navigate to other pages. |
|
Movies | Books | Restaurants | Lodging | Equipment | Waterton Press | Forthcoming Events | News Flashes
Reviews |Investment Consulting | Law | Writing | Golf