 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
63.157.243.88
In Reply to: How does it compare with the original? posted by danj on November 07, 2004 at 22:54:48:
Of all of the films to remake - Alfie? Why? Michael Caine was superlative, the film was very good, but the story was hardly "one for the ages" - Will it really make that much $$$ to justify this decision? The Wall Street Journal panned it, saying that it lacked the working class anger and social commentary "bite" that the first one had.I haven't seen the movie, and I like Jude Law, but I really hope this movie tanks big time. Maybe Hollywood will get the message that originality is better than re-makes once and a while.
In Vino Veritas
Follow Ups:
very much a product of its time and, today, does seem quite dated in its attitudes. Still, I admire its quality, even if more of it comes from the cast than the script. It's subject is a bit uncomfortable - after all, Alfie is a selfish cad who gets wise much later than he should. Remember that it was filmed in 1965 and early 1966 and was considered a bit racy when first released.The remake is a good film but pointless.
...and therein lies much of the problem. No tension, no underlying anger in this Alfie, which was what gave the original film much of its bite.Times have changed far too much since the original. 1966 really was another world.
As much as I love Jude Law (and he does very well with a weak script), I found it very hard to work up much emotion for the vapid NYC singles in Alfie II.
There isn't much reason to see it, unless, like me, you want to drool over the lovely Mr. Law.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
