maxwellperfect
Junior Member
@maxwellperfect
Posts: 3,966
Likes: 1,683
|
Post by maxwellperfect on Mar 7, 2018 19:27:30 GMT
'95 comedy, directed by Amy Heckerling, starring:
Alicia Silverstone
Paul Rudd
Stacey Dash
Brittany Murphy
81%, Rotten Tomatoes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2018 19:34:02 GMT
As far as i remember it was not to bad. But i have not seen it in probably 20 years. But i will rate it 5\10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2018 21:42:52 GMT
I thought it was pretty funny. 7/10
|
|
|
|
Post by sjg on Mar 8, 2018 11:36:53 GMT
5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Mar 8, 2018 19:46:01 GMT
It was too much a farce. Unlike Fast Times, Clueless went full caricature for the leads... wiping out any/all timelessness for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Mar 8, 2018 19:58:23 GMT
It was ok. 7/10. The TV series was actually better.
|
|
Lynx
Sophomore
@lynx0139
Posts: 345
Likes: 195
 
|
Post by Lynx on Mar 8, 2018 20:27:12 GMT
Or, as I call it: Legally Blonde....the prequel.
Whenever we rewatch the Legally Blonde movies, we start with Clueless.....it just feels like it's part of the set.
|
|
|
|
Post by Larcen26 on Mar 8, 2018 20:31:06 GMT
8.
It's a farcical take on Jane Austen and is pretty effective.
Over the top, but with a charismatic cast, fun performances, and, ultimately, a decent message about being yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Mar 10, 2018 5:18:29 GMT
6/10 a bit overrated by fans
|
|
|
|
Post by movielover on Apr 21, 2019 4:57:12 GMT
7/10
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Apr 21, 2019 12:49:29 GMT
8/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Jan 1, 2021 11:58:25 GMT
CLUELESS 7/10 EMMA 1996 (Theatrical) 5/10 EMMA 1996 (TV) 6/10 There's one way in which EMMA 2020 stands out from the rest of the franchise. You see, there's a scene where George Knightley (the love interest) tells the title character that she hurt someone's feelings. In every other version, he would say "Badly done, Emma!" I hated it every time! It sounded like he was scolding his daughter or even his pet! This time, he says "Your treatment of her... It was badly done, indeed!" It's phrased a little differently, yet it feels so dissimilar. What a relief! Among the other changes, there's the wacky comedic approach, but that worsens everything. The actors occasionally mug for the camera unnaturally and Isobel Waller-Bridge and David Schweitzer catchy music score irritatingly accentuates everything. And then there's the scene that's always different in every adaptation: When Emma rides in a carriage with Philip Elton, the local vicar, who confesses his attraction for her. In the 1972 mini-series, he's fairly calmed and always keeps a distance, while Emma gets indignant pretty quickly. She even stops the carriage and gets out. It's not until the later scenes that we get to see his true colors, so her response seemed a little exaggerated. In both of the 1996 movies, Mr. Elton is a little more aggressive (in the made-for-TV one, he even goes for a kiss), so Emma would be justified in getting out, but she chooses to stay in the carriage. Here, Mr. Elton falls on Emma by accident and then keeps his distance for the rest of the scene. Ah, so he's a nice guy? No, because he sucks so much at handling rejection that he stops the carriage and angrily gets out. I don't see the point in comparing those scenes to the one in CLUELESS, since that one takes place in modern day, so gender dynamics are very different. And... That's about it for the changes. Overall, it's just the same story all over again, and to be honest, it's not that great of a story to begin with. Not even Christopher Blauvelt's stunning cinematography can liven things up. 4/10 ------------------------------------- You can read comments of other movies in my blog. |
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Jan 1, 2021 23:10:15 GMT
6/10
|
|
