A really bad movie


Just to equalize the scales here..

What was good in this movie:
*Spielberg's handicraft skills
*Some true moments. I liked most the scene where Harpo and his ex-wife were dancing in the joint and his ex keep telling "be nice now, be nice now" and then he goes "naww..alright". This was good.

What was bad:
*The lead actress.. or the way Spielberg had made her act. I didn't believe her. It seemed she had just been told to do a sad face for most of the time.
*The unreasonable misery. Okay, I aknowledge many people have had and still have the kind of lives like Celie, but in this movie as a hole, I didn't understand the cause of all this. Okay, Albert beat Celie, but why.
*Yes, the absencse of the WHY was the biggest flaw of the movie. Celie told Shug that Albert beat her for not being Shug, but these are only words which doesn't work for me.

This movie was mostly the display of violence but I've had enough of violence. After watching this movie, I start to more and more agree with Aristoteles who has said that a noble drama shouldn't display violence but only the causes and consequences of the violence.

For users who vague wheter to watch this movie or not and who read my post and try to figure out which taste I have, then my favorite movies dealing with Deep Purple kind of subjects are "White Ribbon" and "A Serious Man"

reply

[deleted]

Wow I cannot believe you didnt believe in Whoopi Goldbergs performance. It was completely believable for me. The way she carried herself, Gosh it made me feel miserable for her. She walked around like she was walking constantly on egg shells. Albert was horrible to her. He didnt need to beat her and make her feel like crap just because she wasnt Shug. He got his time with Shug. It was cruel really because the way he was with Shug it kind of showed he was a loving caring man just awful towards poor Celie. Her performance was superb, the best in the whole movie. I carried on watching for her and Shug. Sophia was an alright character, I mostly felt for her when she went to visit her kids after not seeing them 8 years, that nearly went and broke my heart! Overall great movie :)

*Forever Bound* - http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5696657/1/Forever_Bound

reply

Some people just hold too much credit to their OWN opinion.
Whoopi was fantastic in this movie.

reply

English is not your first language, correct?

So what if you didn't like the movie? Shrug.

The Color Purple is a classic movie. Oprah, Danny Glover and Whoopi should be very proud of themselves, as should Spielberg for his directing skills.

reply

You completely don't get this film whatsoever.
Whoopi's acting was some of the best in the film and the second you took your rather obnoxious slander on that you lost me.

reply

[deleted]

<<"*The lead actress.. or the way Spielberg had made her act. I didn't believe her. It seemed she had just been told to do a sad face for most of the time.

I think you missed the totality of Goldberg's performance here. The thing about the role of Celie is that until the latter part of the film when she finally finds a voice, most of the actress's work was perforce internal, and it was a lot more than just "a sad face." Goldberg uses her eyes in particular to great effect; at some points she is so low there is almost no light in them, but when she falls for Shug the happiness it gives her is written large across her face.

*The unreasonable misery. Okay, I acknowledge many people have had and still have the kind of lives like Celie, but in this movie as a hole, I didn't understand the cause of all this. Okay, Albert beat Celie, but why.

Have you given any thought to what life was like for African-Americans in the rural South in the early decades of the Twentieth Century? If you want an explanation for Albert's behavior, look at what happens to Sofia. And realize that for males there was a lot worse than imprisonment that could and did happen to them.

*Yes, the absence of the WHY was the biggest flaw of the movie. Celie told Shug that Albert beat her for not being Shug, but these are only words which doesn't work for me.

To me the WHY is as clear as crystal. Celie's explanation has some validity, but Albert was raised by his father to despise women, and even Shug admits that despite her love for him she knows he's "weak." A weak Black man in a white man's world, particularly in the South, just might come home and take his frustrations out on his wife and kids. If memory serves, in fact, the novel sort of implies as much, but it isn't hard to read it into the scenario.



Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
><

reply

[deleted]

Since you can't spell to save your life, drop dead. This movie was based on a Pulitzer Prize winning novel and should have won all 11 Oscars it was nominated for, and 2 more for which it was not, Steven Spielberg as Best Director and Danny Glover as Best Actor.

If you read the book, you would know that had the movie been filmed page for page, it would have received a hard R-rating what with the child rape and (almost) incest as well as the graphic lesbianism.

Again, drop dead.

reply

Thank you for your kind recommendations. I hope someday I can write as good as you.

Anyway, I'm quite surprised this thread still lives and so many people are so frustrated with me not liking the film. For that reason, I'd like to further explain why I didn't like it.

The themes and subjects in this movie might be important and righteous, but as an artpiece, I think this movie is not so good. It's even hard to describe why.. everything just seems so fake and constructed. No magic there... I remember watching half of this film while coming down an enlightening mushroom trip and I found the movie simply boring.

reply

Where to begin...

I think it's appalling that people feel the need to make fun of your grammar when it seems pretty obvious to me that English is not your first language.

Aside from this, I can see why people would take offense with your assessment of the movie as a whole.

1) You take issue with a severely depressed character being depressed most of the time. Should we just stop showing depressed characters for fear of disturbing your happiness? Frankly, I saw in her so many facets of sadness, I can't comprehend how someone could watch the movie and not see the difference between frowns that shows anger, sorrow, disdain, fear, etc, etc, etc...

2) You take issue with "The unreasonable misery." The point was to convey just how miserable it was for the characters in TCP, and more importantly how life was for an entire race of people during that time. It was a miserable time. Unreasonable? I'm sure they thought it was unreasonable when it was happening to them, but to tell their story... nothing but the truth would be reasonable, and the fact is that life was nearly unbearable for a great many people in that time. The weirdest thing is that you cite A Serious Man as one of the movies you like. Talk about unreasonable misery.

3) You take issue with the causes of the movie. You say they aren't clear and yet when they are completely clear, you say it's not good enough for you. You're demanding it be spelled out for you, but refuse to accept the spelling out as an answer. This makes no sense.

4) You take issue with the display of violence, but use claims like Aristotle said drama shouldn't show violence. I think you may have been talking about Plato who felt that showing things in drama could cause a person to go out of balance while Aristotle, his student, argued that only by viewing certain things as drama could we excise them from ourselves. In other words, Aristotle would have probably said that watching movies of violence would actually help you avoid violent behavior.

From all of this I would have to guess that you weren't really trying to put yourself in the shoes of any of these characters. My guess is that you are white, German, and not very acquainted with anyone not of your race. I may be completely wrong about this, but I can think of no other reason for your odd dislike of this movie. It's almost like you were trying not to like it from the start.

reply

I rather agree with you, but on different points.......saw it again on TCM and was amazed that the rear nude scene of Glover getting up out of the bathtub had been cut.........WHY??????????

and I was really having trouble following the storylines; the Oprah character, Celie, etc., etc.....way too many people and their stories going on in this one.........but I suppose I'm in the minority with that little gripe!!!!

and then I was amazed to read somewhere that the novel is actually about a lesbian love affair, between, I think, Whoopie's character and Shug? is that right? and that 'ol Spielberg turned and twisted it around to reflect something else.

then why in the HELL bother to make the movie if you're not gonna follow the book? did the author herself go along with this huge change in her storyline?

and what for? oh, that's right the money!!!!!!!!!!!!

anyway, TCP is not amongst my favorite movies, but I was glad to be able to see it again, to try to - unsuccessfully - straighten out some of the mess involved with this, that and the other.

and if you are a diehard TCP fan, PLEASE don't rant and yell at me for not agreeing with you........

anyway, still wondering why they cut Danny's butt out of the movie!!!!!

reply

Yes, bad spelling is a capital offense. And I love how defenders of this movie keep bringing up that the book WON THE PULITZER PRIZE!!!! 1) This is a discussion of the movie, not the book, so who cares what awards this story won in a completely different medium? 2) garbage books win the Pulitzer prize all the time (not saying TCP is garbage, in fact I really like it), go look at the list of novels that won the Pultizer and tell me how many you even recognize. Awards mean nothing in establishing which books are great, and even less when discussing movies. In other words, you seem unintelligent and needlessly aggressive.

reply

[deleted]

i loved it as a kid. now can't bear o watch it as an adult. guess i saw it too many times.

___________________
he left u NAKED in a DITCH!

reply