niborskaya Reviews

Four Seasons (2008–2009)

6 hours of my life - Wasted

[2/10 · 4 November 2022]

I'm getting older, I have to pay more attention to what I spend my time doing, watching. I saw Franco Nero was in it, and it peaked my interest. He's just so doggone handsome. That's what I get for being so superficial.

So, 20 minutes of Franco Nero at the beginning of the 1st episode, and intermittent shots of the breath-taking Cornish coast dispersed among the next 6 hours of the series is absolutely all this lugubrious, stilted, awkward show has to offer... Well, wait, now Tom Conti give an endearingly laid back performance. Juliet Mills is charming as a curmudgeonly and sassy grande dame. And that's it. The three female leads, all German actresses, are maddeningly boring, the ingenue trying very hard to be charming and delightful one minute (smiling with her tongue showing ever so slightly), and neurotic and existential the next. And yes, as another reviewer wrote, she looks 14 years old. And she never met a plunging neckline she didn't like.

Finally, that insipid stereotypical 1h990s British musical score, sounds like the same composer who wrote the score for the original House of Cards (which is fabulous, btw).

Why on earth hire three German actresses to play the leads in this story about the British landed gentry?

Well, what's done is done. Luckily, the only people who are at risk of seeing this are those that subscribe to Acorn, so most of the population of the US does not risk of wasting 6 hours of their dwindling years on this half-baked series.

The Fountainhead (1949)

Stilted dialogue, esoteric philosophy....

[7/10 · 20 January 2012]

Rand wrote the screenplay, and it's awful... stilted and melodramatic (the music adds to this element). It would have made a really wonderful radio drama, because the dialogue is over the top, as is the delivery of most of the lines, especially Raymond Massey as Gale Wynan.. his staring off into space to deliver an edict is creepy and odd. I don't get that he's actually thinking about what he's saying, just babbling. The scenes between puppet-master architecture critic Toohey and Peter Keating (the mediocre architect) are some of the best.

I've always found Cooper to be a rather stilted actor, and his acting style (or lack thereof) coupled with the already-stilted dialogue really makes for a very unnatural "I'll say this, you say that, then I say this, and you say that...."

I read somewhere that Cooper really didn't "get" the philosophy behind this story. I believe it. Not sure any of them did....

Love with the Proper Stranger (1963)

Lovely mood picture that

[8/10 · 21 June 2008]

changes horses in midstream from a drama to a kind of farce...but that's not a complaint, both aspects are well-done and the change is not jarring.

Mulligan's direction is simple and honest and uncluttered by gimmicks.

Some observations: The young men in the film all speak with a characteristic "dees, dems and dose" style Italian-American Brooklynese, and the older generation all speak with stereotypical 1st generation Italian accents. However, Angie's accent is almost non-existent. Certainly not like Marisa Tomei's in My Cousin Vinny. Had she had a thicker accent, I think her character would have been less sympathetic...funny how those accents cause one to categorize people. And consequently, Angie comes off like the most intelligent person in the film.

Another minor annoyance: if Rocky and Angie had their one-night stand in the summer (as he mentions), and the action takes place sometime in the fall (they are shivering with the cold while waiting outside in one scene)...it seems inconsistent that she would still have an itty-bitty waist (emphasized by the black dress and apron) at the end of the movie, considering she must be at least 3-4 months pregnant.

I do love this movie, and I watch it whenever I see it playing.

Working Girl (1988)

Bright, feel-good comedy...George Cukor - move over!

[10/10 · 10 September 2007]

It's up there with any of screwball comedies of the 30s... Carole Lombard, Jean Arthur, Margaret Sullivan. a modern classic...and that's not hyperbole!

I've been watching this movie every now and again for almost 20 years (ye gads!), and it's always entertaining. Tonight, I noticed how effective and subtle an actress Melanie Griffith can be when she's directed well. She's a real jewel in this film. Sweet, sexy, smart with a "brain for business and a bod for sin". Mike Nichols clearly loved filming her. Her expressions are priceless. Watch for the wonderful scene when Harrison Ford and she are walking to the elevator and he's asking her out. That face of hers as the elevator doors close is just heavenly. That's Mike Nichols craft/artistry.

Sigourney Weaver also does a masterful job as a two-faced shark business woman. What's so wonderful about her character, the writing, is that Katherine doesn't have a conscience. She's crafty and slick and manipulative, but she's not out to hurt anyone, just put herself first. It's too bad if anyone get's in her way. She's not nasty, but there is no question that she is the most important person in the universe. It's interesting, too, how her duplicity is reflected in her wardrobe. Most of the professional women in the movie are dressed in ultra-conservative boxy business attire, but Katherine/Sigourney dresses sophisticatedly and elegantly. She knows how to play both sides, the professional yet still sexy professional. She's so powerful in herself that she doesn't feel like she has to dress like a man just because she's in a male- dominated career (mergers/acquisitions). yes, she's a monster/ogre, but as she states, "This is BUSINESS".

Harrison Ford is his usual witty, slightly befuddled nice guy. He's the James Stewart of the baby boomer generation.

Joan Cusack is a phenomenon with her iridescent eye-shadow and Bozo hairdo. I think has the funniest line in the movie-a warning to Tess: "You know, sometimes I sing and dance around the apartment in my underwear. Doesn't make me Madonna....never will". that's rich.

Look for Ricki Lake at the wedding.

I put this movie in the same category as Moonstruck, Educating Rita, Shirley Valentine. Transformation movies. I suppose you could call them modern day Cinderella Stories, but it's more about the women saving themselves as opposed to waiting for Prince Charming.

It's a pleasure to see this movie. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do.

Diver Dan (I) (1961)

Baron Baracuda used to scare me!

[7/10 · 8 September 2007]

I really liked this show as a little girl in the mid-60s. I used to tunnel under my covers to the foot of my bed singing the theme song, pretending I was Diver Dan.

I'm not sure it would fly (or swim) today, as it's so old-fashioned and unsophisticated. But I think my parents found it was pretty silly back then, too. And heck, if kids are impressed by Dora Explorer and that show about the octopus with the weenie dog, they'd probably love Diver Dan.

I think there are a couple of episodes posted on Youtube, check them out if you're in the mood for a walk down memory lane (or a dive to the bottom of the bed).

All the Way Home (1963)

Knoxville: Summer of 1915

[10/10 · 30 July 2007]

A wonderful, poignant story, beautifully acted against an Americana background. Quiet and deep. Sad and inevitable. The story is told, almost exclusively, through the eyes of a young (6-ish) boy, and the little man who played "Google-Eyes" brings a remarkable amount of depth and, could it possibly be insight?, into the character.

As an aside, the book upon which the play and subsequent movie was based, A Death in the Family by James Agee, was a Pulitzer prize winner. The American composer Samuel Barber used Agee's prologue to A Death in the Family for the text of his "Knoxville: Summer of 1915" - a concert piece for soprano and orchestra. Also a beautiful, almost languid experience.

This movie is almost a perfect distillation of the book, or at least, the perfect adaptation. There's a lot left out of the movie, a lot of background and some characters, but the movie still manages to capture the deepness of the story.

Beautiful cinematography, wonderful script, quiet interpretations, and a beautiful score.

I did find it available for purchase, just the movie, no extras, on iTunes. I think it's been edited, though, as I clearly recall seeing scenes on TV that weren't in the picture.

Catch this movie if you possibly can. And yes, bring some tissues.

The Fox (1967)

Surprisingly good

[8/10 · 28 June 2007]

What to say about this film. This was very engrossing, although I found the directing a little heavy-handed...the lighting was not subtle at all, and the long-held close ups of Dullea whenever he said something pithy reminded me of Eisenstein's Ivan the Terrible Part I....

Loved the juxtaposition of the fox staring down Helen and then the man's doing the same. Wonderfully done.

Sandy Dennis is a phenomenon...not phenomenal. I'm wondering whose choice it was to make her character so shrill and annoying. I have not read the book, so don't know if Lawrence intended her to be that way or if it was just the "Dennis Touch".

Reminded me of another weird Sandy Dennis movie...That Cold Day in the Park.

I actually enjoyed this movie very much, Helen's ambivalence, the man's menacing presence. How he could be so attractive to Helen and so threatening to Sandy...and how determined he was. And interesting too how he never told Helen that he loved her, just that they belonged together and that he needed her. Very elemental. Whereas Sandy's character finally confesses she does love Helen.

Interesting and complex. I would recommend it. I did, however, think the one love scene between the women looked a little uncomfortable for them. Still, very fun to realize it was made in the 60s...Go CANADA!

In This House of Brede (1975 TV Movie)

"To try my vocation as a Benedictine...

[7/10 · 23 June 2007]

in this House of Brede". Thirty-two years after I first saw this movie as a 15 year old, I still remember Philippa's answer to the old nun's question, "what do you seek here?" as she first enters her novitiate.

Although not Catholic and just barely Protestant, I've always been fascinated in a romantic way with nun stories. Song of Bernadette, Black Narcissus, Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison, A Change of Habit, The Trouble with Angels. (Oddly enough, I've never even been curious about A Nun's Story.) Although I don't remember this movie well, I do remember certain scenes very clearly: Dame Philippa's entrance to the order, her having to avert her eyes while bathing, the young nun singing as she dusts the choir loft, Dame Philippa absent-mindedly expressing out-loud her desire for a cigarette, and her saying good-bye to the man that loved her prior to her embracing the order.

I did attempt to read the book, years later, and found myself, as another person wrote above, "waiting for the movie to start." I've not seen this on TV in years, if ever, since the first showing back in the 70s. But I will see it again some day...So I guess I do recommend it.

Jane Eyre (1934)

Jane....stand up straight for goodness sake!

[5/10 · 17 May 2007]

I give this "version" of Jane Eyre 5 stars because I think every Eyre-lover should see it, for a laugh and a lark. The story has absolutely nothing to do with the book, and it doesn't stand alone as an individual piece either. It's just wretched and sloppy. And I don't blame the production values for that.

Virginia Bruce looks like she really doesn't want to be there, and she can't lose that depression-era slouch...She saunters around Thornfield, flops her away down the road, and just looks dour and unpleasant. Her loosey-goosey posture was really distracting.

Poor old Bertha locked upstairs, clearly off she's off her rocker, but she didn't seem demented enough to be hid away.

The only really good thing about this picture was when Jane tells Brocklhurst off for interrupting her class at Lowood. I half expected her to start slashing away at him with the pointer. Given that the rest of the script had nothing to do with the book, it would have been a nice touch. I mean, why not? Everyone wants Brocklehurst to get his come-uppence. And this Jane is just the girl to do it!

See this one, then see Cusack/Jayston, then see Welles/Fontaine, then see Stephens/Wilson. In that order, for me, the most recent is the most satisfying...except for a few missed marks.

Jane Eyre (1973)

Accurate, yet somehow passionless

[6/10 · 17 May 2007]

I love Jane Eyre. I've read the book at least 11 times over the past 35 years, and read it continually as a teenager, and I want to LOVE every production I see of it. I want ALL of them to be my favorites.

Sadly, I found this production of Jane Eyre to be particularly disappointing (but not nearly as disappointing as Virginia Bruce's completely bizarre version from the 30s).

While this interpretation tells the story in a straightforward manner, and it uses much of the dialogues from the book practically verbatim, I found the direction was off rhythm and the passion of and between the two main characters never materializes. I saw very little internal conflict. I felt neither suffering nor joy from either Jane or Edward. No passion, no pull, no attraction, despite the welcome voice-overs which revealed Jane's inner thoughts.

Again, the story is dealt with very directly, although key transitional scenes are left off and/or covered in the aforementioned voice-overs (i.e., Jane's fleeing Thornfield in the wee morning hours). Those are the kind of liberties that often must be taken for expediency and/or the sake of the overall production; you win some, you lose some. However, a minimum requirement for any production of Jane Eyre is the passionate attraction that pulls these two characters closer and closer to each other.

Sorcha Cusack's interpretation of Jane is rather bland; she is too stoic and impassive and somewhat inexpressive. In the 30s & 40s another famous Jane Eyre, Joan Fontaine, was dubbed the "Wooden Woman", I would here, sadly, christen Cusack the same. Jane is passionate character and is called such many times in the book, not meaning rash or wreckless or over-sexed, but passionate. I saw none of that passion from Ms. Cusack. This I think is the fault of the director's vision. Why do we never see Jane upset about Rochester's supposed relationship with Blanche? She never considers for a moment Rochester's proposition after the lunatic bride is revealed - although she clearly struggles with this in the book. Why was none of this conflict shown...these conflicts are where the agony and ache of this story is found.

Jayston's Rochester is also somewhat one-note. He bellows and blusters, and he never shuts up! Granted, Rochester does like to hear himself talk in the book, as well. But for some reason, he doesn't sound so bombastic in the written word. What he says sinks in, there are colors to his stories, you see/feel his conflict, his distress, his stubborn arrogance. Jayston's Rochester just seems self-centered, egocentric (and not to mention long-winded).

Finally, there really was no chemistry between the two actors/characters at all. And chemistry is what Jane Eyre is all about.

Jane Eyre the novel is particularly wordy (critics complained of this 150 years ago), and some of the dialogue is awkward and unrealistic. For example during the first proposal in the garden, Rochester says: "I sometimes have a queer feeling with regard to you--especially when you are near me, as now: it is as if I had a string somewhere under my left ribs, tightly and inextricably knotted to a similar string situated in the corresponding quarter of your little frame. And if that boisterous Channel, and two hundred miles or so of land come broad between us, I am afraid that cord of communion will be snapt; and then I've a nervous notion I should take to bleeding inwardly."

Now, really... Reading that sentence is one thing (even then, it's a bit much, really). Hearing/watching it in a movie...well...I took to bleeding inwardly! These are the kind of sentences that need judicious editing so that the actual meaning of the sentiment doesn't get lost in the words. I realize now that there is a real art to adapting screenplays from other sources. More is not necessarily always better.

All this being written (speaking of wordiness), I would still recommend that true Janians view this version. I recommend all versions, frankly. None are awful (except that Virginia Bruce version); all have something different to offer. This one, I would say, offers the dialogue lifted directly from the source. So if you MUST hear ALL the words spoken aloud, you will be satisfied.

However, if you're looking for the passion of it, I can't help but suggest the 2006 version with Stephens and Wilson. It's terribly revisionist, but there's no denying the passion/chemistry between the two characters. Stephens is more approachable, less bombastic, more human and multidimensional. The screenplay is inconsistent, but the FLAVOR is there. Other good versions, Dalton's BBC version from the 80s, and of course Welles/Fontaine from the 40s (just the juicy bits).

As I can never get enough of any Jane Eyre, good or bad, I must recommend this one. I don't think it's definitive as it lacks true passion (a score would have helped here, but only as a cover-up), but as far as Jane Eyre is concerned, on can never have too much of a good thing. All productions of Jane Eyre are like my children, I love them all, but I like some more than others. This is like the practical, eldest daughter, dutiful, prim and correct. Stephens/Wilson is like the wildchild daughter, good hearted but free-spirited.

Jane Eyre (2006)

It's all good!

[8/10 · 6 May 2007]

I don't know if I've seen ALL of the film incarnations of Jane Eyre, but I've seen a number of them... And I've been in love with the book since my first reading at 12 years old. In the best of all possible worlds, my fantasy production of Jane Eyre would be a oh....20 part mini- series, and nothing from the novel would be left out...the horrid Reed family, the hippocritical and fatuous Brocklehurst, the wonderful Miss Templeton and her private teas with Jane and Helen Burns, the wonderful dialogues and exchanges between Jane and Rochester, the house party repartee, the voice-overs...Jane's inner monologues, charades at the house party, the long "poor orphan" song Jane sings. St. John would be incredibly handsome, not just passing, the Rivers sisters would be fully fleshed out characters and not fillers....But no one wants to finance a production that's completely honest to the book..just not practicle.

Every production, including this one, that I have seen, though, has contributed something to my fantasy production. In this particular incarnation, it was the expressiveness of Stephen's acting...although he didn't glower and growl and not as bitter a character as Rochester should be, you could see his furtive planning, manipulating Jane, his ambivalence about his plans to woo and wed Jane, his grim determination once the die is cast. Stephen's also brought a contemporary sexiness to Rochester, which was kinda nice!

But while contemporary sexiness is acceptable, contemporary dialog is not. That was distracting and disappointing.

Someday, I would like to see the scene from the book, after the aborted wedding, where he's literally sitting at her bedroom door, waiting for days for her to emerge, his anger when she tries to freeze him out, her relenting, his long explanation, his vulnerability, his insistence that she can save him from himself, and her refusal. The silly chatter about moving to his villa and living as brother and sister was beneath the character of Rochester. However, I didn't mind the necking.

The creepy tapestry was a good touch. The quiji board was a gratuitous addition. If you're going to put in the gypsy scene at all, why not do it was written in the book.... The word gaudy which Rochester uses to describe one of Jane's wedding veils is inappropriate simply because the word was not coined until the early 20th century (after Gaudi the Spanish architect).

When I was a girl, I loved Orson Welles's monstrous, over-bearing Rochester. Still romantic, but sadly more realistic, as an adult I rather like Stephens's interpretation.

Was it a perfect adaptation? Absolutely not. Was it still very enjoyable, absolutely, but only if you can suspend your need of it being a perfect adaptation. What's nice is I can now re-read the book and see these actors in the parts, and over time, I will won't remember which scenes were in the films and which were left out.... so, it's all good.

You know, somedays I'm in the mood for Renata Scotto's Madama Butterfly....other days I'm in the mood for Victoria de los Angeles....it's nice to have a selection of Janes & Edwards from which to choose.

Not as a Stranger (1955)

The Dirty Dozen Doctors

[6/10 · 10 September 2006]

Well, I just saw this on TCM last night, and it was an engrossing hoot. An interesting story oddly cast, with some heavy-handed directing.

Silliness: Broderick Crawford as a Jewish doctor/med. school professor; Lee Marvin, Robert Mitchum, Frank Sinatra - yes, I'd date, any one of them, but none would be my first choice for a PCP. There's a great scene where the young interns sit around and discuss which specialties and locations are the most profitable. To hear Lee Marvin and Sinatra discussing this in their best tough-guy, city-cynic gamblers' accents is just hysterical. and unreal. "dees, dems and dos" Olivia de Havilland: She does a great good job, as usual, despite her borka-borka-borka sing-song pseudo-Swedish accent. She's really nails the character of the career OR nurse, past the first bloom of youth.

Gloria Graham is a little over-blown and sultry as a wealthy, lonely member of the "horse-set" on the prowl. But she plays the role well, not as an evil predatory witch, but somewhat sympathetically. Not easy to do. Mitchum becomes a totally different kind of man when he's around her. Finally, he's in his elemental "I'm gonna throw you around, you're gonna like it, baby." There is one totally ridiculous scene between them, horses, neigh-ing, wind blowing, hormones throbbing. That was almost unwatchable in it's heavy-handedness.

Charles Bickford is on the top of my list of favorite character actors. He's as great in this role, a "old country doctor", as he is in everything he's done that I've seen. There's one scene, when Mitchum, while testing a new stethoscope on Bickford, discovers what Bickford already knows...that he has an aortic aneurysms and is not long for the world. There are a few seconds there, when Bickford makes a split second decision to let Mitchum discover his secret ailment. Watch that scene and you'll see why I just love Charles Bickford.

It's always nice to see Mitchum try to play outside of his comfort zone (Two for the Seesaw). Doesn't always mean you're comfortable watching it, he doesn't always pull it off, but it's always interesting. He's just not the neurotic type.

Still, it was a pleasant diversion, fun to see Broderick Crawford bellowing out his doctor lines a la Willie Stark.

No reason not to watch it, unless Magnificent Obsession is playing opposite.

Cry Wolf (1947)

undercooked potboiler

[5/10 · 1 September 2006]

Just saw this last night for the first time. Must say that I loved Stanwyck running, leaping, jumping, being thrown by a horse, springing up again only to leap from an eight foot fence to the ground...This was clearly no stunt double. The gal was fleet of foot, and tenacious. She loved playing tough cookies, and that's what she served up here, a tough cookie who was really heroic and unafraid. She, as opposed to Flynn, does all the swashbuckling in this movie, and it's worth seeing just for that reason alone.

And it was suspenseful...I was really quite frightened of what she would find in the lab, in the lodge, in the dumb waiter...what's that about the cold cream??? I was so edgy after she scaled the fence into the lodge compound and got lost, that I had to turn off the volume so as not to hear the scary music. So the score really REALLY adds to the suspense.

I loved Errol Flynn in his early swashbucklers, and I really liked the character turns he took in Too Much Too Soon, and The Sun Also Rises and That Forsythe Woman. But here, he's just uneven..sometimes even blank, and then other times he's okay. Clearly the writers were trying to create a Max de Winter or Edward Rochester-type character ...is he good, or bad, sincere or lying? But the execution of the idea doesn't gel enough to satisfy.

So, the writing's choppy and shallow (especially the last 2 lines of dialogue and resolution), and there's not a TON of chemistry between Flynn and Stanwyck. And yes, the other roles are either over, or under written, so you end up with shadows or stereotypes. But still, I found it fun, and there's no reason why NOT to watch this movie, unless Rebecca or Jane Eyre or Pat & Mike is playing on another channel.

The Bridges of Madison County (1995)

Kind of Trite, it's been done before, and better...

[5/10 · 14 February 2006]

Nothing new here. There was a movie from the early 40s, Brief Encounter, which had the exact same theme.

I felt very uncomfortable watching this movie. It was all very obvious, not at all subtle and consequently embarrassing. Also, it was somewhat unrealistic, i.e., when, after they lovers have separated, Eastwood standing drenched in the pouring down rain just staring/glaring at Francesca in the truck. Francesca's "nervous breakdown" of despair in the truck. There she is choking back tears, collapsing into the corner of the seat, hands fluttering all around, while her husband rolls his eyes and keeps driving. Probably attributing it to "womens' issues". I mean, afterall, they were just discussing meatloaf. This thing with the hands was really distracting, it was like she had two pigeons tied to them, they fluttered around throughout the movie, but not in an "italian" way. More like a "unwell Southern Belle" or 1950s East Village beatnik chick.

In general, I found Francesca rather unsypmathetic. She turns on the opera on the radio for dinner, her daughter comes in, turns it to rock n' roll. Francesca, the great martyr, sighs and rolls her eyes.

There were some nice scenes, but the dialogue was SOOOOO heavy-handed and maudlin. Probably would have made a great stage play...lots of self-revelation.

I enjoy Meryl Streep in most things, especially Sophie's Choice and Ironweed. And she wasn't exactly bad in this, but not particularly memorable, either. Eastwood's character, however, was just a rehash of Finch-Hatton/Redford in Out of Africa. He was ghastly. The most emoting he should ever do should be similar to that done in In the Line of Fire. That's about the extent of his range. Anything more just makes me squirm.

Check out Brief Encounter.

King Kong (2005)

Not just special effects...

[8/10 · 5 December 2005]

I laughed, I cried, I covered my eyes at the gruesome parts (this included the slimy worms and insects AND the love scenes between Brody & Watts), I was on the edge of my seat a few times, I marveled that anyone would cast Adrian Brody in a romantic role. I was distracted yet again by Naomi Watt's resemblance to Nicole Kiddman. Although to be fair, Watts' performance is very multidimensional and sympathetic without being cloying (except in the scenes with Brody). She's much more believable (huh?) when she's acting with the ape! And WHAT AN APE! All I can say is that it was the most affecting character on the screen, and I'm flabbergasts that Jackson was able to "give" it a full range of emotion. What a performance! I'm still shaking my head that I could be so moved by a computer-generated gorilla...Extraordinary, really...And at the end, I just wanted them to finish the poor thing off as quickly as possible, it was really so heart-wrenching!

Still some things, though, bother me. (1) some little explanation of the evil natives would have been appreciated (where do they all run off to? and why do they never show their faces again after they offer up the girl?); (2) Jackson & writers went out of their way to establish secondary characters with individual story lines (the 1st mate and the young, brash sailor, the captain of the vessel), but then totally abandon them half-way through the movie; (3) why did the bats wait until Kong awoke to attack him? (4) (this one bothers me a lot) nobody, NOBODY could last on top of the Empire State Building for 10 minutes in the dead of winter (let alone 30) wearing nothing but a silk slip dress. Clearly Jackson has never been up there at Christmas time; finally (5) I REALLY REALLY wish they would set the record straight this time around..forget the aphorisms and homage...Beauty didn't kill the Beast...the selfishness and greed killed it. And that's the same stuff that destroys everything...

But, hey, it's only a movie, and a very entertaining one, at that, despite its inconsistencies.

The Impostors (1998)

Charming, Euro-style comedy

[26 June 2002]

I rented this on video last year and immediately had to have the soundtrack. I've been reading others' comments and have to warn that although I loved this movie, I totally understand why some people wouldn't/couldn't enjoy it. It's not a typical American comedy. Recently I saw Amalie, and The Imposters is, in some ways, more similar to that genre of comedy than to say, an Abbott & Costello or Laurel & Hardy slapstick comedy. Very "indie" feel to it.

Just a strange, delightful, creative and quirky little movie with wonderful performances and a kick-butt sound-track! I do hope you all like it.