Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel Movie Critics Review Curly Sue
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2024
- Movie reviews and ratings by former Chicago Sun-Times film critic Roger Ebert and former Chicago Tribune movie critic Gene Siskel.
Revisit as they share thoughts on the best films of their era. From the best movies of the 1980s 1990s and 2000s to now, housed here are a collection of film trailers, reviews, and movie previews for you to enjoy. We’ll see you at the movies.
"It's sentimental manipulation but I. DON'T. CARE."
"*WHAT?*"
I love that.
Genskiel I knew who said this just from reading it lol
Well, you were on to something when you said John Hughes knew that James Belushi and Kelly Lynch have no chemistry because I read a report that Hughes and Belushi didn't get along at all and argued frequently during filming.
I always loved that too.
That "WHAT?!" killed me too. Sounded like Borat walked on set.
Another great example of Gene and Roger's great chemistry.
The top of their heads were cut off just to make this video look more widescreen in its ratio. Please don't do that. These guys argued for years about maintaining the original aspect ratio. Don't make a mockery of what they campaigned for with their own videos.
Love it when they go at each other!
movies are magic, john hughes was magic. ebert is 100% right. Kelly Lynch, John Belushi, Alison Porter have immense charm that oozes out of the screen, Charlie Chaplin's "The Kid" is considered a masterpiece so why can't "Curly Sue" be one too? You have a legend, frickin John Hughes, writing and directing, theres never going to be another John Hughes... appreciate what the man left behind...
It's looks like new DVD releases review history books documentary about biography book fan club so much it's looks like holiday season start show hollywood story life look back at movie made maze 🚨 I'm waiting on RUclips videos https page get take off by the way Alison Porter
Do you know what me too Derek Llewellyn feel like something to
I saw this as a kid in the theater and I remember it being the first time I was ever really disappointed with a movie in the theater. Prior to that, you're just excited to go to the movies. It's a big treat. But this movie was the first movie I saw in theaters that just felt unfulfilling.
Do you know what I am really remember it being called back in time travel would be there by side effects from home hollywood from magic New dream key new
I'm with Ebert all the way on this one! I've loved Curly Sue ever since I saw it in the theater in '91. I will never understand the hate. It's one of Hughes' best as far as I'm concerned! You're telling me that the film is so bad that there is absolutely nothing to enjoy about it? In a pig's eye!
Hollywood studios bowl of WB studio's same place looks good I love it so much it's looks like new DVD releases on Netflix with oasr awesome picture awards TCM channel on money made movie
It's looks like new homes in movie history channel interview review history books documentary about biography and legend of house
Curly Sue sucked. Kelly Lynch has the comedic charisma of a TSA line at the airport.
Agree with Gene.
Do you have the siskel ebert review where they review the movie mouse hunt with Nathan lane or perhaps d3 mighty ducks?
They never reviewed D3, on TV anyway
Do you have their review of mouse hunt?
I don't care if nothing makes sense in this movie, but it was very entertaining and has a strong "feel good" moment. That's all we're looking for. We don't care about the technicality of it all. You know when a movie is good when after you watch it, you get that satisfying feeling that everything's going to be just fine. And if you happen to get a little teary-eyed, then the movie got to you!
Sure, this is fiction and this kind of stuff doesn't happen in real life. Just watch it and you'll find this to be quite pleasant and enjoyable to watch. Great for the entire family of all ages. It's a timeless film.
This movie it's looks like magic made me feel like crying myself before seeing her screen record her hair cut off by her herself gave them did way
You HAVE to watch it entirely to get it. Back then, and still today, the trailer was confusing. Even the main promo poster showing a child wearing an undershirt while holding a set of card raised some eyebrows. After watching it, it became obvious to me that this is a "Theme Film". The film emulates the "Talkie" era of Hollywood. The film even points that out when Curly Sue explains her named was influenced by Three Stooge Curly Howard. Anyway, I kinda get vibes that the original script for this film was set in the 1930's and it seems like Hughes did not get the needed budget to recreate the 1930's, so the only change made to the script was set it at present time. It's not a bad film at all. I really do believe this was supposed to be set in the 1930's and they did not have the needed budget to make it happen.
I know the feel good moment you're speaking of. It's when the credits rolled and it was mercifully over.
I'm kind of with Ebert on this...but not to the same level as planes, trains and automobiles, my God! I remember watching this as a kid and I do remember the James Belushi/Alison Porter relationship on screen being really good and that is what drew me in. I seem to remember James Belushi's character realising Curly Sue is better off with the lady lawyer, but sort of trying to scupper it and then giving up when he realises what he is doing...but luckily the lady lawyer falls in love with him anyway! I think Siskel does have a point when it comes the chemistry between the adult leads...in that it is kind of non-existent...but when your a kid all that stuff seems boring to you anyway, even if it's done well, and I guess I was always a sucker as a kid for the whole wise-ass kid that could go toe to toe with grown-ups! That's why I liked Macaulay Culkin and Fred Savage so much growing up.
So their relationship drew you in and yet you understand what Siskel is saying? That seems contradictory?
@@MrsCambers I was referring to relationship between the Bill Dancer character (played by James Belushi) and Curly Sue; not between Belushi and Kelly Lynch...so no contradiction.
@@BelatedCommiseration ah gotcha.
Saw this at the movies lol.
I had to watch this movie because this argument between Siskel and Ebert was so awesome. Curly Sue sucked so bad. Team Siskel by a mile. Kelly Lynch has the comedic ability of a potted fern, and the chemistry of office supplies. Porter was tanked by the writing - one minute she's talking/acting like a grizzled adult, the next she's bawling like a 4-year-old. Poor James Belushi. Comedy needs characters to play off of, and his choices were a badly written child character or a block of balsa wood (Lynch). It's too bad because the first 20 minutes are really good and in line with John Hughes other films. As soon as Lynch's character is introduced it nosedives.
This is one of Ebert's brain damaged moments. Add it right next to Cop and 1/2.
...and Home Alone 3.
@@cliffordshafran9250 it's looks like it was great seeing it take for kids are in the world part of the house in magazine magic New dream key new
Nah, this movie sucks imho - its one of those where you want to yell at the screen for the stupid decisions they make. Watch all Dogs go to heaven instead.