Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics
|
It is currently Mon May 20, 2013 8:21 am
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
| Author |
Message |
|
James Berardinelli
Site Admin
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm Posts: 2771 Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
|
 NEW IN TOWN
Click here for the review of New in TownSPOILERS must be tagged with the "SPOILER" tag!
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:47 pm |
|
 |
|
Kimsey
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
I had a sneaky feeling that all the trailers I had seen proclaiming this to be "The Funniest Comedy of 2009 So Far!" were a bunch of hooey... Wait, have there been any other comedies in 2009?
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:54 pm |
|
 |
|
Patrick
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
Man, remember when Renee Zellwiger used to be hot....yeah, me too.
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:03 pm |
|
 |
|
Sebastian
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
or when she used to chose good projects. man, what is happening with romantic comedies nowadays? do ALL of them have to be subpar?
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:08 pm |
|
 |
|
Shade
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
There is a place in the world for feel-good, PG-rated romantic comedies, but there's no excuse for being formulaic. I like Renee, but I have never understood the appeal of Connick. I find it hard to imagine circumstances that will cause me to ever see this.
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:24 pm |
|
 |
|
Patrick
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
It's a rom-com, they are formulaic with very few exceptions. It's like a violent action movie for women. Also, Harry Connick Jr. was the best thing about Bug.
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:29 pm |
|
 |
|
Sebastian
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
but the fact that a film is formulaic doesn't mean it has to be unpleasant or dumb. Bride Wars was 100% predictable, but that's not an excuse for being bad. likewise, a film like New In Town SHOULD be both formulaic AND enjoyable. I was one of the few people that enjoyed PS I love you, for example. I know that the film is formulaic and predictable and blah blah, but I still liked it because I found it touching and entertaining.
it all has to do with the movie's ability to certain, suspend disbelief and touch. in the case of rom-coms, predictability should be expected.
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:33 pm |
|
 |
|
Robert Holloway
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
I have a trip to the dentist tomorrow for a cleaning. A painful affair that I never look forward to. Given the choice of attending the dentist or "New in Town". I'll settle back and get my teeth cleaned. I fail to see why any studio would think that Rene Zellwegger is an attrractive female lead. In the UK she was unceremoniously laughed off the screen for her legendary Worzel Gummidge impersonation in "Cold Mountain". And guess what? She won an oscar. But that's another thread  And who is Worzel Gummidge?  Rob PS - I added the image to test the feature
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:05 pm |
|
 |
|
Shelobfan
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
The commercial voice over claims it is a mix of Legally Blonde and Sweet Home Alabama! Judging from the review I guess that summation is unfortunately correct.
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 7:16 pm |
|
 |
|
James Berardinelli
Site Admin
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm Posts: 2771 Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:12 pm |
|
 |
|
Shade
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
You're right, but again, there's no excuse for being bad and formulaic. A lot of formulaic movies are very good (Slumdog and Gran Torino being two recent examples). I have no problem with predictability, because some viewers want that and there is nothing wrong with such an outlook. But without engaging, true characters and genuine chemistry, a movie like this fails (just as most violent action movies fail).
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 8:16 pm |
|
 |
|
Ryan
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
"Palin-esque appeal"? Well, I'm assured to never like this movie. Yeah, I wasn't surprised to see this as yet another mediocre rom-com. And Rene Zellwegger? Attractive? In this day and age? Far from it.
|
| Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:21 pm |
|
 |
|
Robert Holloway
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
James You are such a sad Doctor Who fan  Did you know that you can now see it each week on the BBC iPlayer? Rob
|
| Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:36 am |
|
 |
|
Joseph
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
renee either looks good or really bad in every single one of her movies. no consistency. judging from the trailer, she looks attractive in this one. but i was not watching in hd or on the big screen. so i could be wrong.
this is an entirely ridiculous post.
|
| Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:04 am |
|
 |
|
Shelobfan
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
I have always liked Renee and have had to defend her frequently in my movie-going circle of peers. I really liked the way she looked in Me, Myself and Irene and she wasn't bad-looking in the Bridget Jones films either. What I have always used as a strong defense is how consistent she is at being good in the roles she takes, no matter what genre they fall into. I know we are ripping on her for Cold Mountain, but that was a pretty good performance in a pretty good film. I think this film may have made it more difficult for me to defend her in the future though.
|
| Thu Jan 29, 2009 1:16 am |
|
 |
|
jksander
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
Frankly, I'm always skeptical when I see Harry Connick Jr attached to a "romantic comedy." I haven't been able to ever stand his acting. The closest he came to a good role was as an animated character in The Iron Giant, a highly underrated film.
|
| Sat Feb 14, 2009 7:34 pm |
|
 |
|
Patrick
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
Harry Connick, Jr. was awesome in Bug...just so you know
|
| Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:10 pm |
|
 |
|
jksander
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN (non-SPOILER discussion)
Never saw it ... I'll check it out though, so as to be fair to the man, who remains one of my favorite musicians thanks to his funk albums of the early 90s.
|
| Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:18 pm |
|
 |
|
Awf Hand
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN
There must be a more regional appeal to this movie than most are realizing. I live up in West Central Wisconsin, and have been through New Ulm, MN on many occasions.
I can take your slings and arrows, so lemme have 'em.
I enjoyed this movie. I went into seeing it: 1. having read JB's review 2. having been voted down on my primary pick of Slumdog Millionaire 3. being dragged along with another couple
and I enjoyed it.
I enjoyed the small-towness of the movie and found it to be a pleasant combination of "Doc Hollywood" and "The Majestic". In addition to this, I feel that Sioban Fallon Hogan deserves mention for her work here. She's brought many quirky characters to life and likely still uses the side entrance at the red carpet events. HC Jr. doesn't do much for me and could've been swapped with almost any male lead, but RZ is very attractive (she must work out) and I enjoyed her in this fish-out-of-water story.
Hit me.
|
| Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:45 pm |
|
 |
|
James Berardinelli
Site Admin
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm Posts: 2771 Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
|
 Re: NEW IN TOWN
*SLAP* 
|
| Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:51 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 5 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|