Moulin Rouge

TwoShedsJackson

Great film, but why the bloody hell do a bunch of two dozen thirteen year old girls and some sixteen year old male ****wits go to a musical that's set in 1900? Same thing happened at 'Romeo & Juliet'.

Morons.

R. Daneel Olivaw

Because it was hyped endlessly..... and that bloke who went swimming in his own **** for the suppositories in Train Spotting is in it, along with what's her face from Days of Thunder.

I don't know, I guess some people like strange things.

yellum

They both had those "great" pop songs in the charts. Thats a good reason to see a movie isn't it ?

Belisarius

annoying Pop ****e and kiddies aside ,how was the actual film , tbh Im not expecting much but?

SweetBirdOfTruth

yes, it's cheap and it's tawdry and it flatters to deceive with its repertoire of knowing references to pop-culture classics for the children of the revolution to nod knowingly along to (hey c'mon, like a virgin was cheesy, yes, but you have to bless him for the way he introduced it - it was almost a stroke of peter sellars-equalling genius). maybe all of this makes it too low brow for the high brows and too high brow for the low brows but i don't see why it results in the furrowed brows of those who mean to mock and disparage it for ... for what? for not being strictly ballroom all over again? for not being gene kelly dancing with that bloody mouse?

it's a thoroughly modern musical, all bohemian bonhomie, fighting with the modern dance floor of manumission, not just that of the ministry of sound. yes, it's more like summer holiday than singing in the rain, and yes, it's lots of sound and fury signifying ... what? what most all musicals try to signify? that love - real love, romantic love - means not having to compromise? maybe, yes. it's all the myths of love, isn't it? diarmuid and grainne trying to flee from the fated advances of fionn maccumhail, romeo and juliet and their star-crossed affair, even the orpheus and eurydice myth luhrmann has himself linked the film with.

it's escapist entertainment, it's what we go to the movies for. if seeing this in its opening weekend makes me a moron then call the surgeon and tell him i'm ready for my lobotomy, cause it's ****e like this makes me a happy cinema-going moron. it's a cinematic experience. big and bright and loud and colourful and - separating itself from the psychedelic sound and lightshow the previous few words might suggest - it's a spectacular spectacular (being self referential in what i wish were a clever clever sort of way but know isn't - bugger). it's a spectacle of colour to make the monks with the illuminated scriptures squeeeeel with delight if they hadn't already taken a vow of silence.

yet at the same time as being that spectacle of colour, yes, it has only the depth of a just 17 comic strip. you're more likely to cry at the death of bambi's mum (surely that doesn't rate as a spoiler, does it? oh, sorry, i thought evryone knew) than you are at the fate (spoiler? nah. he begins at the end and ends at the beginning, so you know what's coming before she does) that befalls our hero and heorine here, i know, i know, but why is this surface sheen and an inability to be seen to be practically perfect in evry way classed here as imperfection when others (of lesser ability and ambition) get away with far worse?

the same critics panning this this week are the critics who praised a knight's tale with its knowing nod to chaucer and shrek for its farting jokes - i'm sorry to be rude (yeah) but to borrow from the klf, what the **** is going on? have i had that lobotomy and just forgot all about it or has the whole world simply gone mad? those critics expect - want, demand - more of luhrmann simply because his pedigree - strictly ballroom and romeo + juliet specifically, he lacked the cachet for them to actually know any of the theatre work - lead them to insist on perfection, especially when they're replaying those movies on that silver-screen in their mind's hindsight, a screen which magically erases all blemishes better than oil of ulay. maybe they should remember this - the baz luhrman here is the same baz luhrman behind the sunscream song. nuff said on that score, i think. he ain't buck nekkid like some, but he surely has feet of clay.

for me, most all (most, not all) of the music worked (and even the ost seems better in retrospect than it did at first purchase), the whole thing had a kinetic energy that was sweetness, especially roxanne which was - imo - powerfully great, a gem of a sequence. ewan looked great, that coat, the collar, the scarf, those eyes and the foppish hair. even nicole kidman (who previously i have been unable to forgive for the travesty that was far and away, the worst movie of all time ... ever. away with you and all your votes for rancid aluminium and battlefield earth), even her, here i found surprisingly engaging. and praise too to that absinthe angel (i'm tempted to get back on the drink at the thought of a glass bringing her with it), kylie - she's a sweetie and not just because nick cave says so. i hope that when she goes head to head in the charts with posh that she eats the spice-stick for breakfast and spits out the bones for sophie bexter-ellis to choke on (now that's a recording i'd gladly pay for).

to quote the duke: generally i liked it.

Dustaz

i dont normally read ANYTHING over 4 paragraphs on the 'INTARWEB' cos im a lazy bastid and generally its drivel, but that sir was a a fine article. Well done, even if you copied and pasted it im not saying you did )

adnans

just watched moulin rouge (1952 version) on ch4 today and i just cant imagine a musical competing with this piece of movie art i watched today. ill pass untill it get sout on video or even tv. one is enough, and i quite liked the one ive seen.

adnans

Volvagia

Its the music that drew the 13 year olds! Damn you Christina, Mya, Pink, Lil Kim!

SweetBirdOfTruth

how many threads does a film need around here?

T.G Catter

Lots. i watched the original on tv the other day, have to say i was well impressed, even sacraficed watching neighbours.:p