Rate The Brothers Grimm

[ssampier]

Not the gum drop buttons!

The Auld Grump

Do you know the Muffin Man?

 

[Hand of Evil]

Ya, calling the mud-thing a Gingerbread Man seemed odd to me, too. Blah.

Because of shape and color but it could have been the Ninjabread Man

 

[DonTadow]

It was ok, but too inconsistant for me to really get into it. Things seemed to happen solely to move the plot with little explanation how they happened. Plus with all the accesents thrown around (Heath LEdger stopped using his halfway through the movie) the dialogue flew past me sometimes and I didn't know what was going on or how they got to certain places.

 

[ragboy]

Plus with all the accesents thrown around (Heath LEdger stopped using his halfway through the movie) the dialogue flew past me sometimes and I didn't know what was going on or how they got to certain places.

I didn't notice that Heath Ledger lost his accent, which would have been weird since he's Australian... I agree about the sound editing. It seemed like they were talking through a tank of water sometimes, or the scene/sound got cut too close to the last syllable or something.

Other than that, I really enjoyed it. There were some disjointed moments, and I didn't buy Cavaldi's conversion at the end, but it was a pretty fun ride.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

It was fun and I will probably rent it on DVD to heard the commentaries and watch any special features. Pitty Heath's character, he's the one who woke the sleeping women with the kiss of truw wuv, but she was apparently interested in canoodiling with Damen's character.

And I wanted the Queen to win.

Cavaldi's transformation did seem to be missing some steps.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

A 3. Well below "average". I went to see it having heard how bad it was, hoping that once again critics couldn't see a good movie when it's right in front of them. I mean, this is TERRY GILLIAM we're talking about. But I walked out and said to my friends with a sigh, "Well that was just AWFUL."

It had no... style! Acting was either wooden or over-the-top bad. The story was a mess, the plotting was clunky, the effects couldn't save it (they NEVER EVER do), and the few actually entertaining moments and shadowy reflections of potential are wasted. It's a greater crime than "The Movie That Must Not Be Named (based on a certain trendy RPG)" because this one had so much more going for it and THIS was all we got as a result. A low-rent disaster like the movie that must not be named can, in time, perhaps be forgiven it's transgressions (although doing a sequel can potentially end up only multiplying the previous crimes and earning Klingon-like discommodation). In the aftermath of Lord of the Rings where the world is never going to be the same again, given the shocking amounts of money and SQUANDERED talent this movie is unforgivable.

In truth it comes down to the writing. It always STARTS with the writing. Good writing can save actors from otherwise career-ending performances, render the worlds crappiest effects into endearing quirks. Even career-best acting can be spent uselessly on bad writing. Bad writing cannot be covered up even if Industrial Light and Magic makes daily human sacrifices as they work. This script blew donkeys and there is no excuse for it to have been fed money and talent only to have the feces spread across celluloid and passed as entertainment.

Afterwards I went to Wal-Mart, picked up the DVD of The Dirty Dozen (c 1967), and even though I've seen it a dozen times already on cable I enjoyed it much more than that crap (c 2005) I watched in the theater. I guess I can now add Terry Gilliam to the list of names that I once THOUGHT I could trust but whose disappointing efforts are steadily killing my desire to see first-run movies in theaters rather than wait for guinea pig reviews and the DVD.

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

Cavaldi's transformation did seem to be missing some steps.

LIke....all of them!


Since we're spoiling away here, my favorite line was:

"I made that armor. It's not magic. It's just shiny."

That really cracked me up.

It's a greater crime than "The Movie That Must Not Be Named (based on a certain trendy RPG)" because this one had so much more going for it and THIS was all we got as a result.

This I have to disagree with. While The Brothers Grimm is by no means perfect, it is miles ahead of the D&D movie. Or were you referring to that trilogy based on the LotR game Decipher put out?

 

[WayneLigon]

Went to see it last night and I quite liked it. Certainly one of the best fantasy films I've seen in quite awhile, and all the fairy tale references were very entertaining.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

I quite liked the werewolf transformation. The wolf-head flipping back into his wolfskin clothing reminded me of a Transformer

 

[Chain Lightning]

I also gave it a 3.

The one French guy assigned to follow the Brothers had the worst accent. 99% of the time I couldn't understand a word he was saying.

The tempo of dialogue was all jittery. I couldn't relax and watch the film. So was the cutting. Its subtle, but after a while it gets on your nerves. Its like being in a room where the temperature changes chaotically at random time intervals. Hard to explain.

I love a lot of Gilliam's works, but this one was bad. I wonder what went wrong. Maybe the studio got a hold of it and did "their edit"? Who knows....