INTOLERABLE CRUELTY

First of all, as you can predict from the photos, Intolerable Cruelty is a romantic-comedy:) Actually, it is not a different kind of movie; the story is not attractive one. Nevertheless, what makes the movie so much poignant is, I think, because George Clooney and Catherina Zeta-Jones. In the movie, they are a perfect couple:) George Clooney plays Miles Massey. He is a very successful Los Angeles divorce attorney. Nevertheless, he feels very bored and has midlife crisis. (Indeed, I have not known these vocobulary items "midlife crisis". I have learnt it after watching this movie:) ) Miles is very talented in winning cases regardless of the evidence stacked against his clients. The most significant example of that is when Bonnie Donaly(he is a client of Miles) retains his services and bleeds her TV producer husband, Donovan, despite his having caught her entertaining a pool cleaner in a house with no pool. It is interseting, is not it?

Similarly strong evidence weighs against Rex , who hires Miles to represent him when his wife, Marylin (Catherine Zeta-Jones), obtains a video of her husband with a woman in a motel room. In fact, Rex is a man who is a "woman hunter" as we say in Turkish... As the movie goes on, Miles turns the tables on Marylin in court and he presents a surprise witness who exposes her as a gold-digger who set out to marry a wealthy fool. As a result, Marylin comes away with nothing.

In order to take revenge, Marylin goes to Miles' office with her future husband, Howard. Her future husband is an oil tycoon. When she goes to Miles' office, she insists on signing the famous "Massey pre-nup" as proof her love is not related to material concerns. Nevertheless, later, Howard destroys the contract during their wedding as a gesture of his love, I think:).

Six months later when she reappears, the mutual attraction between Marylin and Miles is stronger than ever. From now on, it is consistently funny:) The film often remin me classic comedies like "The Awful Truth" and " Mr. and Mrs. Smith". There are clever dialogues, dark humor in the movie. It stars George Clooney again.The concept" Massey Pre-Nup" is remembeed with him:) Actually, it is the document that virtually assures that rich people will not have to pay their spouse any penny when they get divorced. What is the comic aspect of it is The Massey Pre-Nup is so tight that they spend a whole semester at Harvard Law School teaching it. This is told in a humurous way in the movie. You should watch those scenes:)

Intolerable Cruelty is a movie about rich people and their money. In other words, there is not much of a story here. There are rich lawyers, rich husbands and rich women who marry rich men for their money. There are genuinely funny moments and I liked hearing the Simon and Garfunkel music in the movie, but overall Intolerable Cruelty is a barely tolerable movie.I am sorry to say that. And Catherine Zeta-Jones is so beautiful that I could see why a rich man would eat a pre-nuptial agreement for her sake:) For the most part, however, I found the characters in the movie so unlikable and their motives so greedy that I had a really hard time staying interested in the movie. Sure there is the dialogue (although I don't understand why the line "You fascinate me" is so funny, especially since it is in every single trailer and television commercial and by the time it is shown in the movie it shouldn't be nearly as funny as it could have been - yet my friend still laughed hysterically). Sure there are unique characters - Donovan Donaly is a funny rich guy; Howard Doyle is a funny, annoying rich guy; and I am sure I will be talking about the character called Wheezy Joe for years:)

The only thing that I really got from this movie is that it is better not to be rich:) Nevertheless, much more important thing is that I have learned new vocobularies.

" Cretinous wanker" is one of them. Miles uttered it while he is speaking with one of his friends.His friend asked: " Remember my friend Ollie?, Ollie Olerud? And he said: "Short, cretinous wanker?" Actually, 'cretinous' means a person afflicted with cretinism. Or it can be a slang meaning 'silly'. The second one is more suitable here. 'Wanker" means n offensive word to insult somebody, especially a man, and t show angeror dislike.

Also, I heard this sentence : "His tantrum might have ended this schmo's life and ruined his own." by Donavan. Here, I could not get the meaning of "tantrum" at first. After looking up to the dictionary, I learned that it means a sudden short period of angry, unreasonable behaviour, especially in a child. And, "schmo" means a person who is stupid or foolish n an annoying way.

Bonnie said:> "So that I can massage the kinks out of our testimony." to Miles. Here, I earned two new words. The first one is " massage" which means 'to change facts, figures, etc. in order to make them seem better than they really are.' The second one is "kink". It means 'a bend or twist in something that is usually straight.'

ONE OF THEM IS LYING, SO IS THE OTHER: HOW TO LOSE A GUY IN TEN DAYS

One of them is lying, so is the other...This is a wonderful romantic comedy:) I liked it very much. Actually, before watching it, I understood that there will be a strong love between the couples athe end. And this is just like that in the movie.

The movie tells the relationship of two couples: Andie Anderson (Kate Hudson)and Benjamin Barry(Matthew McConaughey). Neverthelss, this is not as you think. It is a strange relationship. Andie is a writer of editorials for women’s magazine “Composure”. She wants to write what she thinks and believes instead of what her editor thinks and believes will get people to read. One day, Andie comes to the rescue of one of her friends, Linda, who risks her job. And worse, she felt much embarrassment after failing to think of material for the new issue because of a recent breakup. The split of Lİnda and her darling becomes a big inspiration for Andie’s new article in which she will explore the ways in which women scare off their potential suitors. To do so, she decides she needs to find a man, and then she needs to start a relationship with him, and then do all those things that dig under his skin. The dialogues related to this moments are very comic:) I noted the most entertaining one:)

The Boss: So what you gonna do?

Andie :l'm trying to...''And only then will the people of Tajikistan know true and lasting peace.''

The Boss: Andie, it's brilliant.lt's really moving. But it's never going to appearin Composure Magazine.

As the victim, Benjamin is chosen. In fact, Benjamin chooses her. Benjamin is an advertising professional. And what did draw my attention is that Benjamin has an name that starts with the next letter of the alphabet after Andie’s:) I do not if this is a coincidence; nevertheless, it is very interesting, is not it:) As all you can predict and conveniently, he and Andie meet at a bar. Most probably, all of you has understood that she is there to find an victim. Of course Benjamin's goal is not different from Andie's:) He is there to get a coincidence with a girl to fall in love with him. Indeed, if he is able to find such a girl, He will win a bet and get the important new client looking at his firm.

As usual, these two begin a love affair. Actually, Andie's choosing such a way is pointless. If Andie is writing about the “common” things women do to drive men away, she doesn’t need to actually go out and do those things to an unsuspecting man. She could just ask women and—here’s a concept—men what those things are and why they think it gets on men’s bad sides. To do what Andie does is just cruel, really, but it adds that all-important element of conflict—no matter how desperate the attempt to do so may seem. Then there are her questionable techniques for success. At one point, Andie takes Benjamin to a couple’s therapist, who is actually the dumped friend in disguise. The article should never see the light of day because of this. First, I’m sure there’s some kind of law against that degree of fraud. Second, what kind of material can you get from it except falsified and useless. What if such therapy is a valid way of fixing relationships? Third, I hope her aspirations for legitimate writing aren’t true, because I don’t want that kind of journalist around.

Benjamin is also in the wrong way. The key difference, though, is that while Andie is purposely working to devastate a relationship, he is going above and beyond to keep that relationship alive. There’s also the problem with the way in which the bet is made. Benjamin invades a private meeting to try and convince his boss to give him the big important account. In any real world situation, he’d be risking his job or at least be asked to leave immediately so as not to embarrass anyone. But this is the movie world where the boss simply doesn’t care. Maybe it’s because more people could get hurt by what she’s doing. Even, she involves his family in her lie. But ultimately, Andie is worse than Benjamin. Nevertheless, I did not like the way Benjamin eats lobster on their first date. I doubt no woman would allow the possibility of being alone with him:)

The lanuage in the movie is very clear and understandable. I did not have difficulty. I have learned new words. "Rattlesnake" is one of them. I heard the word while Andie was talking with her girlfriends. She said: "A brand-new houseon the road side, and it's made outof rattlesnake hide." Rattlesnake means a poisonous American snake that makes a noise like a rattle with its tail when it is angry or afraid.

Another new word for me is "giddy". Benjamin uses this word while he is talking with his boss and his colleques about the importance of diamons in order to make a woman fall in love with a man." He says: "Selling a diamond to a womanis like making her fall in love. She has to feel giddy,desirous, adventurous,and desperate." "Giddy" means feeling that everything is moving and that you are going to fall.

"Goofy" is the other new word. While Benjamin and Andie is gettting on the motorbike, Benjamin says her: "You get to wearthe goofy-looking helmet." Actually, "goofy" means silly, stupid.

How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days grows more and more tedious as the couple continues to hide their individual secrets and becomes annoying once things between them (and the movie itself) get serious and go beyond the bet and the article. The last series of scenes grows worse because it just continues to set up big scenes where everything could be resolved in the big, dramatic way they’re going to be resolved anyway, but the movie keeps on going. Do not forget to watch it:)

BECOMİNG JANE...

"A woman especially if she has the misfortune of knowing anything, should conceal it as well as she can." -Jane Austen

Anne Hathaway apparently took this quote very much to heart, as her performance manages to perfectly conceal the wit and intelligence that made Austen not just an exceptional woman, but an exceptional author.

"Becoming a woman. Becoming a legend."

"Her own life is her greatest inspiration."

"Between sense and sensibility and pride and prejudice was a life worth writing about."

Actually, this sentences can give you some idea about the movie.:) Becoming Jane is a movie that features some fantastic shots, a middling romance, good performances, and a sleep-inducing pace. I wanted to like the movie. Both Anne Hathaway (as Jane) and James McAvoy (as would-be suitor Tom Lefroy) are good.The supporting cast is also quite good, in particular Lady Gresham in the movie:) What I realized as the most attracting points of the movie are the scenes and the technology usage in some parts The scenes are perfect and the technology is very well used.

Movie begins with the scene on which Jane sitting in a window in the early morning, apparently suffering from a bit of writer's block. She works through this by letting loose her creative juices on a piano, much to the chagrin of the rest of her family so early in the morning. While Jane longs to put creative thought to blank page, her mother wishes she would find a husband and marry into some money. This while her father says she should follow her heart; money will bring comfort, but it will not fill a heart.

Tom Lefroy is a poor young lawyer, with a reliance on an allowance from his uncle. In an effort to help him get his head on straight, he is sent to spend time with relatives in the country. It is during this supposedly head-clearing trip that he encounters Jane.
At first, it is clear that the two are at odds in their outlook. In movie talk, that means they will end up being madly attracted to each other. Anyway, the relationship is not one smiled upon by their respective families. Jane's mother wishes her to marry into wealth (the family was suffering financial woes), while Lefroy's uncle will not consent to him marrying a country girl. Then there is Lady Gresham, a lonely woman who believes she is above everyone when it comes to deciding what is best for all around her. She wishes Jane to accept the pending proposal from her nephew, Mr. Wisley.

It is my understanding that the romance that is depicted is more speculation than anything else. There is a factual basis in the mention of Lefroy in a pair of letters to Jane's older sister, Cassandra (Anna Maxwell Martin), however, the details are not known. This allows screenwriters Kevin Hood and Sarah Williams room to play with what may have happened. They use elements of her novels as the seeds of the story. In a way they reverse engineer her writings to create potential inspirations from her real life. This may be pretty close, as most authors take cues from their real life for their writing. It would not be much of a stretch to assign Austen's narrative elements to pieces of her life in the search to fill in what she was like.

My conflicted feelings are too hard to ignore. I wanted to like the film, and by and large the performances are good. The failure lies in the hands of the screenwriters and on the shoulders of director Julian Jarrold. The screenplay fails to offer anything of real interest, and the direction is straightforward and just a little plain. It is a tale of unfulfilled potential.

MUSIC AND LYRICS..LETS LOOK AT THE LOVE FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE..

Firstly, I want to write the most memorable dialogues for me:)
Alex Fletcher: The few syllables you got out were absolutely devastating.
Alex Fletcher: We could even re-pot the ficus.
Alex Fletcher: Just a little bit louder, because this song is intended for humans, okay? Way Back Into Love, take two.
Alex Fletcher: You seem angry - click your pen!
Alex Fletcher: It doesn't have to be perfect. Just spit it out. They're just lyrics.
Sophie Fisher: "Just lyrics"?
Alex Fletcher: Lyrics are important. They're just not as important as melody.

Sophie Fisher: A melody is like seeing someone for the first time. The physical attraction. Sex.

Alex Fletcher: I so get that.

Music & Lyrics" ---------Infact there never could’ve been an aptly named and well timed movie last
valentine’s season. The story is a diffferent one.

On the first scene, who drew my attention immediately was adorable Alex Fletcher (Grant). As I always mention I am a fun of Hugh Grant:) In the movie, he is s throwback pop star from the 80s who’s no longer in demand. Fletcher somewhat manages to earn his loaf doing the odd show here and there for the older crowd. It is survival by the thread and the artist in him yearns for more acclaim. He gets his much awaited breakthrough when reigning music queen Cora Corman ropes him in to write and record a duet with her.

Soon an ecstatic Alex recalls he might be good with music, but as a lyric
ist he’s a deadbeat and hasn’t written a song in years. Now he has a deadline to meet!
Weighed down by this hit or miss opportunity of a lifetime, Fletcher gets help from unexpected quarters: His pretty florist Sophie (Drew) has a knack for words and gladly agrees to do her part for whom she believes to be a talented but unsung hero. And you realize why they say “Behind every successful man is a woman." :)
Romance and realization blooms between the two as he teaches her how to sing and she weaves the magic of words for him. So warm love begins as Fletcher instructs a crooning Sophie
—“Oh please try a bit louder. It’s intended for humans after all!”

But time is short and there are promises to be fulfilled. Fletcher has seen the bottom of the life pile and understandably wants to climb out fast. Sophie, having broken up with her fiancé is still going through a lot of emotional turmoil as she gets more and more involved with her new man.

T his movie may not be in the same league of “Four weddings”, “Love actually” or a “Notting Hill” but it’s no lesser either. A witty, humorous, well scripted, beautiful plot and agreeable character portrayal are some of the many assets observed in this delightful movie. Even better, it never moves focus away from “realism”.
Fabulous performance again from Grant. He’s such a talented and natural actor that you never realize he’s acting! Yes they don’t come any better than him. Though Barrymore does her part and ensures the onscreen chemistry is perfect between the pair, she still is a below average actor. I’m sure someone else should have played Sophie—someone who does justice to Hugh Grant! Yet, I’m not complaining.
Great warm funny romantic movie & enjoyable to the core. That, if you don’t have a cannonball where your heart should be :)

Neverheless, the movie has several flaws.
1)Thechemistry between the lead pair being the first.Hugh and Drew justdon’t have that chemistry that Hugh Grant-Julia Roberts(NottingHill),Jude Law-Cameron Diaz(The Holiday) or even Keanu Reeves-CharlizeTheron(Sweet November)share.Individually they’re good....as a pair theydon’t gel.

2)Secondly the movie has an extremely abrupt ending.Iwanted the director to pack in another 5 mins. for a sequence whereDrew Barrymore finally musters up courage to give it in the face to hercollege professor(Sloan Cates being played by Campbell Scott) who usesher.

3)The romance between the lead characters has not beendeveloped properly except that they sleep once(which I felt was a part that was not needed).

4)The first half of the film is too slow and quite a drag actually.It picks up pace in the second half. Allin all....you can skip it easily....unless you’re a big fan of HughGrant or Drew Barrymore who are damn good albeit individually.

<

EVEN AFTERLIFE

What Dreams My Come... This is a perfect film. What drew my sttention firstly was the mystical atmosphere created in the movie. You experiece both this world and the afterlife.

What really amazed me was seeing Robin Williams, as a happily married physician who dies in a freak accident, spends most of the time laughing, crying, or staring into the sky with puppy woe, and Annabella Sciorra, as his artist wife (who commits suicide in response to his death), matches him beam for wet-eyed beam. Actually, the scenes are magnificent too. What I can say about the scenes is that What Dreams May Come presents the afterlife as a metaphysical place. For example, in afterlife, the things that drew my attention most is a pastoral hall of mirrors whose inhabitants must learn, then relearn, the rules.

The first act of "What Dreams May Come" is almost enough to make you not care what may come of the rest of the movie. In the opening half hour, Chris and Annie Nielsen (Williams and Sciorra) lose their two children in an automobile accident. (There's nothing quite like undersize coffins to spell unendurable tragedy.) The family dalmatian has already died. And, much worse, Chris violently perishes while attempting to save someone else's life. As a ghost, he is given a tour of his own wake and funeral, and he then lands inside a bursting landscape. It's no accident that the place resembles a painting. Heaven in the movie is whatever you want it to be, and Chris, in death, has imagined himself inside a gently cascading version of one of his wife's deep-saturated canvases. He slides down hills, dunking himself in a thick blue pond. And then, he emerges with paint clinging to his clothes. He leaps off a cliff and lands with a gentle thud. Paths are painted with purple petals, and there are classical columned structures that look like the ones for Greek Gods as we always read in Greek Mythology.

Towards the mid of the movie, Chris meets an angel guide, Albert, who speaks in pop koans. ''I want to see my children!'' Chris cries. ''When you do,'' replies Albert, ''you will.'' (I think he means, Today is the first day of the rest of your eternity.) For all of the joys of heaven, Chris remains tormented by the family he's lost, and, indeed, the entire picture is haunted by loss. Annie's sinful death consigns her to the film's equally florid vision of hell (a field of heads poking up from the ground, and so on), and it's up to Chris to rescue her to reunite with his twin spirit.

What Dreams May Come is in such a organized way that it practically dissolves as you watch it. The idea of two people sustaining romantic chemistry into the next world may, in truth, be a paradox, at least it was like that for me. Nevertheless, Williams and Sciorra do convince you that they're soul mates in life and death. The two gaze at each other so longingly that it's easy to believe they'd be happy just growing old together.

What Dreams May Come is not very dramatic. I felt as if I was stuck inside a two-hour dream sequence. As Chris and company land on the shore and approach the gates of hell, he begins to recall a time he spent with his son. It was a truly defining moment, when he tells his son that he respects him and would want him by his side even through the fires of hell. For me, this leads to a very important revelation. Chris has not been thinking of Annie, he says, and is losing the bond they share. Does this imply that he can only love one at a time? What I deducted from this scene is that Chris’ love for his son takes away from the love he can share with his wife. And indeed, it seems when he first arrives in heaven he has nearly forgotten his children and only seeks his wife. If Chris and Annie have this incredible bond, what does that say for the rest of us? Is not it:)

DO YOU REALLY LOVE HIM, OR IS THIS JUST ABOUT WINNING?

Michael O'Neal and Julianne Potter have been friends for years but when Michael rings Julianne to tell her he is getting married to a lady called Kimberly Wallace, she finally realizes her true feelingsto him, which are that she loves him. When she gets there , she can't do it so she tries to do everything to get them to break up. Yes, this is a romantic comedy and the plot is very attractive actually.

"Do you really love him? Or is this just about winning?"
"I've seen you a lot more naked that this."
"Yes... but thing's are... different now. "

Here, main characters Michael and Julianne and Kimberly are typically sympathetic characters. Nevertheless, the situation of Jualianne is a bit different I think. I liken Julianne to a tragic hero:) The ones we have learnt in our drama lessons. What I see her is an inability to communicate an unspoken love from a lack of confidence or from a fear of failure. She loves Michael; nevertheless, she cannot express it openly. While she is waiting for him to be together again, she has been informed that the man she loves so muxh will get married. What is much worse is that the one who gives this news is Michael himself. What a pitty, is not it? As a someone who is very sensitive, I felt ver sad at that moments. And memorible quote of her is "Michael... I love you. I've loved you for nine years, I've just been too arrogant and scared to realize it, and... well, now I'm just scared. So, I realize this comes at a very inopportune time but I really have this gigantic favor to ask of you. Choose me. Marry me. Let me make you happy. Oh, that sounds like three favors, doesn't it? "

If I explain the story much more deeply, I can say these: Julianne is a food critic who is called at the last minute to her best friend's wedding. However, her best friend also happens to be an ex-boyfriend, Michael for whom she still has feelings for, despite nine years of having been apart. In the past, they made a pact whereby if neither of them were married by the time they reached the age of 28, they would marry each other. Just prior to Julianne's 28th birthday, Michael rings her in a state of excitement to inform her that he is about to marry Kimmy, whom he has only recently met. She is devastated by Michael's sudden engagement to Kimmy. Kimm is a wealthy and perfectly beautiful architecture student, and rushes off to Chicago.
Actually, what I found I so much ironic in this movie is that alhough the audience is given all the information of the relationships between the main characters, the characters themselves are unaware of these relationships:) For example, once Julianne arrives in Chicago, she begins work on doing everything she can to claim Michael as her own. She is like a home-breaker as we say in Turkish too:). Half the fun is watching Julianne hovering in the background, witnessing her schemes spring into motion and then backfire unexpectedly:) And unfortunately, neither Michael nor Kimmy are the wiser.

George... you're not at all the way I envisioned. With the way Jules went on about you, I thought you would be.... uh...
Gay?
Yes... gay!
I just pretend to be gay!
But why?

This conversation above is between Julianne and George. While watching the movie this conversation s very comic and sweet for me. Julianne decides that this wedding is quite unacceptable, and she sets her mind to breaking up the couple, enlisting the reluctant help of her gay editor, George Downes. George is close friend of Julianne with whom Julianne can discuss her predicament. If there is one character that is outstanding in this movie, it would be George. He is excellent in his role, and very funny at times. His performance is the highlight of the movie. When Julianne's maneuvers fail to produce the desired results, she calls George for help:) He promptly flies out to help her, and in the highlight of the entire movie, George pretends to be Julianne's fiancee.

The scenes on which Kimmy sees Julianne and Michael are kissing each other are very comic too. What makes them s much comic is the conversations between Kimmy and Julianne:) Kimmy says: "You kissed him!At my parents' house. On my wedding day." Julianne: "I love this man, and there is no way I am going to give him up for some big-haired food critic."

Kimmy: "I think I'm going to cry. "

Julianne: "Me too. "

Also, there are other conversations that I will not forget forever:) One of them is between George and Julianne.

George: "When you kissed Michael did he kiss you back? "

Julianne: "What do you mean? We were lip to lip. "

Another is between Michael and Julianne:

Michael: "Kimmy says if you love someone you say it, you say it right then, out loud. Otherwise the moment just..."

Julianne: "Passes you by..."

Michael: "Passes you by..."

Julianne: "It is the duty of the best man to dance with the maid of honor."

Michael: " Dance? You can't dance. When did you learn how to dance?"

Julianne: "I've got moves you've never seen."

But, what really makes My Best Friend's Wedding so much attractive is the quirky humor that permeates the entire movie. Also soundtacks are perfect and go well with the scenes. Dusty Springfield's "Wishin' and Hopin'" is one of the soundteack that I found amazing. Also, while George is pretending to be Julianne's fiancee and telling how they first met, he breaks out into a rendition of Dionne Warwick's "I Say a Little Prayer". He is soon joined by a chorus of Michael's and Kimmy's relatives, seated around the same table. The merriment then spreads to the rest of the restaurant in which they are eating, and soon the entire restaurant is singing along.

Bite the bullet... tell him that you love him.
"My Best Friend's Wedding" is great. It will make you laugh out loud, it will make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, and it will tug at your heart strings. Will Julianne reveal her true feelings to Michael? Will Michael marry Kimmy or Julianne? In order or find answers to these questions, you should watch this movie. This is the movie you should be watching!

THIS IS AN INTERSTING DAIRY

I absolutely loved this movie. The entire cast played convincing and realistic characters, especially the character of Bridget herself. There was much use of the f-word, but it is important to remember that in parts of England, the word is not considered nearly as offensive. If you are not easily offended and can look over the language and the occasional sex talk, which wasn’t as terrible as many movies, you find yourself entertained beyond belief. I have been laughing for days after seeing it the second time and completely intend to see it again. Colin Firth is one of the best actors I’ve seen in a while, and watching him the second time convinced me only more that he is brilliant. It was also very entertaining to see a realistic fight in a movie for once. I would recommend this movie to anyone who is not easily offended and who enjoys a good laugh.

Renee Zellweger stars as Bridget Jones,is a single 30. Her love life is non-existent, while her consumption of alcohol and her addiction to cigarettes is close to lethal. At the end of her proverbial rope, she attempts to take charge of her life by keeping a diary. In addition to info on the latest "singleton" her mother has tried to set her up with, Mark Darcy notations in her diary include the exact number of cigarettes she's smoked that day and updates on her ever-fluctuating weight.

There are two men in Bridget's life. One of them is a gentleman and a cad. The former insults Bridget at a party and wears an unforgivable sweater. Bridget begins dating her boss, Daniel Cleaver (played by Hugh Grant). On the surface, the two actually seem to have a wonderful relationship, but you just know that they're not going to have a fairy tale ending. Mark Darcy pops in and out of the picture as Bridget and Daniel's relationship develops and then falls apart.

Filmgoers should have fun equating Bridget's relationship trials and tribulations with their own experiences, or that of their friends. There's a little bit of Bridget in almost everyone. Moviegoers who love to laugh out loud without fear of embarrassment will find like-minded audiences attending "Bridget Jones's Diary." "Bridget Jones's Diary" is an intelligent, and humorous dialogue delivered by an outstanding cast. Even "serious" moviegoers can relax and enjoy this delightful film.

I loved this film and immediately wanted to rush out and buy the soundtrack. The songs selected for the soundtrack fit the film perfectly and became a major contributor to the film's overall ambience. Every emotion Bridget goes through is verbalized through the teaming of the scenes with the songs. The competition for Bridget between Firth and Grant may be the stuff of fantasy but Bridget's unerring ability to choose the wrong man is the reality check with which every woman in the audience can identify. And that's what makes this film something you'll want to add to your home video collection next to Four Weddings and a Funeral.

Zellweger's accent is pretty much flawless and the script is extremely funny. The wonderful Jim Broadbent gives a subtle, unsentimental and strangely moving performance as Bridget's dad while Gemma Jones is suitably as her mother. From the first moment, I began laughing around the first frame and didn't really stop. I loved it. some of the sentences of Bridget I caught are: "She's used to run around your lawn... with no clothes on, remember?"

"Perpetua-- slightly senior... and therefore thinks she's in charge of me. Most of the time..."

"lintendto."

"Oh, well,here we go. Trying hard to fight off a vision...of Mum and Auntie Una in fishnet tights"

"Did you fancy Kafir the first time that you saw him?"

"Oh,joy. I am broadcasting genius. Celebrating by cooking birthday feast for close friends. Have sneaking suspicion..."

WEDDING PLANNER

"You're the envy of your future sister-in-law Janice... whom I overheard say at the last gown fiitting, " Look at those thighs. I'd kill for Tracy's thighs." This is the first sentence I found very interesting in the movie. You know that "thigh" means the top part of the leg between the knee and the hip.While Mary was saying this sentence to Janice, I could not get the meaning of it.Although, I have comprehended the meaing of that, I cannot explain it to you know:) I will try again and again, and I will write it here, I promise:)

And what about these:

- " Earwax." "X" on a double letter.

-"A" on a triple word. Seventy-two points.

-No, I challenge you. " Earwax" is two words."

-It's one.

- You're bluffiing.

Actually, most of the utterances in the movie were like these. THey were all enjoyable and nice to hear. The sentences were so smooth. I did not have much difficulty while I was watching it. The accents of characters were mostly British English accent. Even if you do not know the meanings of the vocobulary, you can deduct them from them from contexts. NonetheIess, I cannot say that I really recommed you to watch this movie. Anyway, you will like it very much if you ara fun of romance films. I am one of them:) And I always try to watch such kinds of movies. I like them:)

Please, look at this sentence of Steve:)

"Maria, I know I'm a pain in the neck. I just wantyou to be happy." I have not heard such a usage. This is an idiom. And it tells the whole thing. You do not have to know he previous or followng sentences:) You can deduct that Steve is regretful about his behaviors. He knows that he always talks about events and makes comments on the issues:)

When it comes to the story, it is very romantic. Nevertheless, I cannot continue writing before I mention the acting of Jennifier Lopez. She is wonderful. She has done her job perfectly for me. However, I cannot say the same thing for the whole movie.'The Wedding Planner' is one of the most horrendous film experiences I've ever had the immense displeasure to sit through. It starts poorly, gets progressively worse, and treads water for only a few seconds.

Of course, we're expected to appreciate that Mary and Steve are the ones who should really be together, but it's tough to give a monkey's when the pairing is so completely devoid of any sort of spark or chemistry. Mary Fiore has been a dedicated and highly successful wedding planner for five years, effortlessly controlling everything involved in the festivities. In fact, so much of her time is taken up by her profession that romance has been absent from her personal life for two whole years. That all changes when she has a strained meet with doctor Steve Edison, who saves her from a runaway garbage cart. Following a magical night which they spend watching an old movie in a San Francisco park, Mary is appalled to discover a couple days later that Steve is engaged to marry her latest client, Fran. Forced to work with the couple as she plans their wedding, Mary cannot help but fall for Steve, who is likewise beginning to have doubts about Fran being "the one" for him.
The romantic comedy genre is one that you don't really expect to be unpredictable. In almost all cases, the two unlikely lovers end up together in the end. Because of this, it is vital that the film exhibit at least sweetness and entertainment value. You will not find something very different from this. Then, lets watch it and gve your own decision. Perhaps I am wrong:)

YOU HAVE MESAGE IN A BOTTLE!!!

"l could always steer for home when you were my home." This is the first sentence that sounded me very interesting at the beginning of the movie. I had not known the meaaning of 'steer for something' until I learnt that it means 'to move on a particular direction'. This is the first word that I learnt in this movie:) When Terresa is reading the mesage in the bottle, there are nice explanations that draw may attention very much:) For example:

"You came into my dream last night with that smile...

... that always held me like a lover...

...rocked me like a child.

All l remember from the dream..."

Actually, this is a nice movie. You can find that the concept of 'love' is depicted in a different way. At first, it seems to be a very familiar story, but once you continue watching it, you find uncommon nuances in the realtionship of two lovers.the story starts on a deserted New England beach, where Teresa as a divorced mother with a young son is taking a stroll. During her stroll, she spies a glass bottle out of the wet loam. Picking up it, she finds a typewritten note inside addressed to a woman named Catherine, whom the unknown writer deeply misses. Moved by the heartfelt and stirring words of love lost, Teresa shows the strange letter to her coworkers upon her return to the Chicago Tribune. There, she works as a researcher.

Seeing the potential for a great human interest story, Teresa's editor decides to run the letter as a front page item. Suprisingly, the letter's publication generates an overwhelming response from Tribune readers, who send hundreds of pieces of fan mail in support. While reading lots of mails with her best friend Lina, a couple of letters pick their interest. These letters are from individuals who found two similar letters stuffed in glass bottles.

While arranging her research resources, Teresa finds out the originator of the mysterious messages. It is a shipwright from North Carolina named Garret Blake, who lost his wife Catherine two years prior. Desperately wanting to better know the man, Teresa git on the next plane and finds herself in the peaceful seaside village where Garret calls home. Pretending to be a tourist, Teresa strikes up a fast friendship with the grieving shipwright, in search of material that she can use for writing a follow up piece. However, Teresa gets more than she bargained for when she falls under Garret's spell as she comes to understand the man and his unforgettable loss. Unfortunately, as the relationship between Teresa and Garret deepens, so does the risk of Teresa's true motives being revealed.

Although it has so much spectacular, what I did not like about is that the core of the story, the romance between Garret and Teresa lacks emotional resonance. It id not something memoriable. The performances of the characters are not so much good.

Another shortfall of the film is that there is no sense of urgency to the proceedings. While the issue of Teresa publishing the letters in the Tribune eventually becomes a source of contention in the relationship, it is not a major source of complications. In fact, the scene in which Garret inevitably finds out the truth comes across as overly-melodramatic and his reaction seems to be implausibility. Had Teresa gone to find Garret with a story deadline hanging over her head, and if the letters had made Garret a national celebrity assuring him a thorough hounding by the popular press, then the stakes of the relationship and its consequences would have been higher. Consequently, the dynamics of the relationship would have been more interesting, and the struggle to keep the relationship alive would have been worth fighting.

If you're looking for an old-fashioned romance with two beautiful but bland people, you might find "Message in a Bottle" adequate. Other than some nice scenery and some interesting character bits from the supporting actors, "Message in a Bottle" is an overly-long and emotionally-manipulative movie:)

" I'm taking her out tomorrow morning."

"Test saiI. Round the point and back." are the other sentences that Drew my attention.

IS NOVEMBER ENOUGH TO LOVE SO MUCH?

Humans need to face hard situations to realize that the best things in life do not have to do with money, but these simple things are important to human life. We can find a good example of this situation in the film called Sweet November. The main characters of the movie are Keanu Revees as Nelson Moss, and Charlize Theron as Sara Deever. Through this movie, I became conscious that money cannot fulfill our lives and that there are things with more value than money that can make us happier.
This movie starts when Sara and Nelson meet each other while they are taking a test to renew their driver’s licenses.

Nelson Moss is a hard-working man. He is very dedicated to his work. As I concluded, he has most probably lost value of the other things in life that make it worth living. While renewing his license at the local DMV(something like that:) ) Nelson has a chance meeting with Sara Deever. This event is very interesting and funny actually:) Sara is thrown out of the testing center for responding to a question that Nelson whispers to her. Without a license, she persuades Nelson to act as her chauffeur one night. That night has a special meaning. Because she breaks into an animal shelter and save two puppies from being put to death. As a joyous, beautiful, young woman, SARA has learned not to take life for granted for even a second. Sara AS a result, she presents Nelson with a proposition. For the entire month of November, she will invite him to move in with her, and spend every minute with him. Nelson thinks she's crazy.

After a failed meeting the next day and a nasty confrontation with his boss, Nelson finds himself fired from his job. To make matters worse, Anjelica leaves him. With nothing to lose, Nelson finally accepts Sara's offer. Her goal, of course, is to make him a better,humane, person. As Nelson gradually falls for her, Sara is frightened to find herself attracted to him in a way she never has before.

.. . . While living with her, Nelson falls in love with Sara, but still does not know that she has an incurable disease (which is never named in the movie). When Nelson finds out about her disease, he gives her all his support and tries to be with her all the time. Sara thinks it would be a good idea to help him to improve his life, so she proposes that he moves into her apartment to undergo a spiritual rehabilitation. After Sara meets Nelson, she notices that he is a self-centered and humorless man, whose life revolves around his work and that he is living only superficially. Sara refuses to be with him and asks him to leave her, telling him that he has to continue without her, and that his life is already better because he has learned the real value of life.

People work to get all those material possessions that never will fill their spirits, but we need to leave the materialism behind and start becoming a better person. I realized that money is not everything and that what we have right here, right now, is the only thing we can ever be sure of, and that money can not buy the most valuable thing on this world, a life. This movie made me realize that the best things in life are concentrated in those things that we do not usually pay attention to, things that seem simple, things that have no economical value, but are really the most important things in our life, such as, the feeling of freedom or just the beat of our heart. Life could change in a second, and we had better enjoy those things that life offers us for free.

The aspect of the movie I appreciated the most was the lesson I learned through this film. Nelson at first rejects that proposition, but after all Sara’s insistences, he agrees to live with her and accept that proposition. For example, in this movie, Nelson never thought that the woman who changed his life, the one he really loved, was going to died, and he could not use his money to save her. In this movie, Sara Deever, a woman who is living her life as simply as she could, and dying from an incurable disease, knows Nelson Moss, who is the typical money obsessed advertising executive man but who changed because he realized that the money has not the value it seem to have. From that day, he goes back to his life, but this time knowing the real meaning of living.

The language in the movie is not difficult to understand. I was able to catch most of the words and sentences..Some of them were very interesting to hear for me:)

For example, while watching the movie at home, Nelson tried to change the channel. At that moment, Angelice entered and he said:

" Us...Right..Hey, is not there some kinda limit on us talks? You know, one okay, two is necessary, three, cruel and unusual."

While Sara and Nelson were going in the car, Sarah said that: "Does your mother know you treat women like hookers? Or did she raise you to think being nice means patronizing the whole world?" In this sentence, I had not known the meaning of the hooker, nevertheless, after having looked at it, I realized that it means bad woman.

In the movie, most of time, Sara said "Yup!" It represented that Sara was not pleasant the condition happening that moment, therefore she used it in order to show her feeling. One of the scenes, again while she was with Nelson in the car, She said that: "Yep, Face it. It is your fault. I cannot drive. The least you can do is schlep me somewhere. It is quick, painless..." Actually, have you known the word 'schlep' ? I have not heard it before. It means someone who is dense.. This wasa another word that I learnt with this movie:)

Again, in one of the scenes, while Sara and Nelson was at home, it was raining very much. Nelson went out. Sara immediately follwed him and said that he should wait a second. Nelson turned and said: "I have no words to describe how totally whacked you are!" Here, most probably whacked means something negative. When I looked up the dictionary, I found that it means being tired very much. Nevertheless, after the sentence of Nelson, Sara got angry very much and said: " What are you so pissed of about! " 'Piss of' means 'damn you'. Therefore, 'whacked' is much more then what it means... Why do not yu help about that? Perhaps you know the exact meaning of it, or you may have much better idea:)

WONDERFULL!!!!

"Life Is Beautiful" is wonderfully written. When it tries to be funny, it is hilarious. In one very pointed scene, Guido, hoping to find someone who opposes the fascists, quietly asks another man what his politics are--before the question even registers in the man's head, he addresses his children by name: Benito and Adolpho. Still, not everything works against Guido; the scene where he finally wins over Dora is absolutely perfect. All this comedy works very much in the film's favor. I have no qualms about saying "Life Is Beautiful" is better than "Schindler's List;" and it boils down to the comedy. Guido's clownish nature makes it even harder to watch what happens to him in the concentration camp--but by the same token. it gives him a defiant air that's very satisfying, and helps relieve the oppressiveness of the totalitarian state that looms over everyone in the film.

Just watching the film, you can tell that it was a labor of love for the actors. Two stand out in my mind: the first is Giorgio Cantarini, who plays Joshua. Though he's a little old for the very early scenes, he carries off the later scenes beautifully--it's really hard to believe so young a child can act so effectively. Roberto Benigni, however, is the true creative genius who pulls the film together. In addition to his masterful work co-writing and directing "Life is Beautiful," he also stars in it; he won my heart within his first minute on screen.

If "Life Is Beautiful" has a weakness, it's the translation. There were several places where the subtitles seemed a great deal shorter than the spoken lines--and one where I thought I caught a name that didn't make it into the subtitle. Despite this problem, the subtitles are preferable to a dubbing. Beyond the traditional arguments regarding the value of hearing the original actors--which I'd say apply more to "Life Is Beautiful" than any other foreign film I've seen--there would be a thorny translation problem with the fact that some minor characters speak English or German--languages not understood by the characters they're addressing; it would become confusing if the other characters spoke English instead of Italian--as would happen if the film were dubbed.

I think the main basis is the strong thematic content relating to the holocaust. The worst violence is all off screen--in a way, it's more jarring than most films' depictions on screen; the big exception is a scene involving a stack of corpses. I didn't catch any nudity or coarse language--though I don't speak Italian, so the latter may have been lost in translation (but I doubt it). The real problem for children is they'll probably will lose patience with the subtitles. That's a shame, since all else being equal, I'd say the film would be a good family film: the film's moving depiction of some of the worst events in history, and the depiction of Guido and Dora's great--even heroic--love for each other and their son, both weigh heavily in its favor.

Still, calling it a family film doesn't do "Life Is Beautiful" justice. One often thinks of family films as bland. "Life is Beautiful" will make you laugh plenty, cry some, and think. It's uplifting, charming, and creative. I honestly can't think of a word against it.

NOT AS GOOD AS OTHERS:(

Before watching Shrek, I told a friend of mine that out of all of the recent sequels coming out in Hollywood this year, that Shrek the Third had the potential to be an extraordinary bust. I knew that, going in, but stood to my guns to keep an open mind and try to watch the movie and like it for what it is. And what that was, was a bust. It definitely was a let down, all within the first 15 minutes of this film and it was never able to pick up the pieces and put together anything resembling the first two Shrek movies:(

This version of Shrek had huge shoes to fill. Shrek 2 was one of the most comical animated movies that I have ever seen and the first Shrek was equally as impressive with its combination of pop references and gags that even a 5 year-old kid could pick up on. The gags or ‘gas’ ran out on this one.
The movie starts off pretty funny as Prince Charming (voice Rupert Everett), disgraced after a failed attempt to steal our hero's wife and becoming heir to the throne of the kingdom of Far, Far Away, is forced to relive his humiliation night after night in a dinner theater production. Adding insult to injury, his dressing room is in the alley. Upon learning that Shrek (voice of Mike Myers) is filling in as king, Charming decides to try to go after the throne again with the help of other fairy tale villains.

Shrek and Fiona (voice of Cameron Diaz) have a difficult time ruling. After a failed knighting, christening, and royal introduction, they retire for the night, only to be notified of the frog King Harold's (voice of John Cleese) imminent death. On his death bed, Harold names Shrek the new king in a prolonged death scene for a frog followed by a chorus of the things singing a Wings song. But before the King ‘croaked’, Shrek was able to get info out of the king and he mentions that a young boy named Arthur is next in line after Shrek for the throne.

Having no intention of becoming king, Shrek, with sidekicks Donkey (voice of Eddie Murphy) and Puss in Boots (voice of Antonio Banderas), sets off to find Arthur and bring him back, but as they're setting off, Fiona reveals she's pregnant.
This is where the so-called plot thickens. Shrek not only fights off his responsibility as king but he now has to fight his fears of becoming a father himself, and there's even a very funny dream sequence that has him trying to handle a swarm of baby ogres as they’re puking, crapping, and causing mischief all over the place.
Arthur or Artie’s off at Worcestershire, a high school where he's hated by everyone, including the leader of the jousting team Lancelot (Arthur’s supposed right hand man in other adaptations of the King Arthur legend) and the girl he's always loved Guinevere (King Arthur’s queen in other adaptations), or Gwen, as he calls her.
Justin Timberlake provides the voice for Artie. His character is strictly used as a plot device to try and movie along. There’s no connection to him as a character and he’s definitely a character that you don’t want to see in Shrek 4, which unfortunately I just found out was in the preproduction stages of development. Timberlake's performance doesn't help matters much.

Soon, the gang is shipwrecked on an island where they meet Merlin, Artie's old magic teacher who had a nervous breakdown and has gone bonkers.
Although this show has a ton of characters, its major problem is the lack of story and gags that didn’t work. Shrek the Third provides only mild entertainment, with the laughs trickling down as it plods toward an ending that's far less than "happily ever after" at least for weary viewers despite the reliably game efforts of the A-list vocal cast. Granted, there are still plenty of amusing, even laugh-out-loud funny moments sprinkled throughout Shrek the Third, but compared to the first two films, Shrek the Third is sadly third-rate.

The narrative momentum and comic energy begin right about the point Shrek and his sidekicks begin their quest for Artie, who's an exceedingly bland addition to the cast of characters. The idea of the once and future King Arthur as a bullied high school nerd, kicked around by "Big Man on Campus" Lancelot is no more than mildly amusing; and the film's laugh-free spin on the wizard Merlin as a befuddled, aging hippie feels positively stale.

Characters wear out their welcome or the sub-plot regarding Shrek's worries about his impending fatherhood. I never once bought into Shrek not really wanting fatherhood. Never felt for his character once on this. Felt like the filmmakers were trying to force a new emotion on Shrek to try and add his character added depth, which he didn’t need. Shrek was already the most developed character in the series by far. Hello, the name of the movie is Shrek for goodness sakes.

The filmmakers should’ve taken that energy used to develop Shrek’s character and focused elsewhere like say on the Disney princesses. They were not so much good for me. Why were they there? I understand that they were trying to focus on some sort of feminist movement slash Charlie Angels thing going on, but it was a little over the top. And was Fiona’s mom there? It seems like she was there the whole movie but only said two words. Way to earn a paycheck. All in all, Shrek the Third was a bit dissappointment for me. Neertheless, there are good things too. As expected, visually Shrek the Third delivers fantastic computer generated imagery. Stunning landscapes, fluid motions and a keen attention to detail are all accounted for. Yet, I couldn’t help but want more.

The graphics, while extremely well done, are basically the same as the previous movies. I’m from the school of going above and beyond and I felt the animators should have added a new ‘WOW’ factor. You can’t sit on your past triumphs in this town if you want to stay ahead of the game.
Also, as expected, we’re given a very healthy dose of adult humor, wrapped around innuendos and read-between-the-lines dialogue (we’ve got to trick the children of course). As with all movies, some jokes hit and some miss. Mostly, the antics in Shrek the Third are singles intermixed with a few doubles; the only home run I can think of was during the Pinnochio interrogation — even I was getting confused with all the double speak. Yet as stated previously, while there are funny moments, I’ve basically seen the same material in the first two movies.

The language is very clear to understand. The accent of Shrek is Scottish. In his these speeches, to understand that is not so much difficult.

" Give me that! Your fiying days are over.That's 20 pieces of silver for the witch. Next!"

"Okay, fine. Attention, all fairy tale things. Do not get comfortable. Your welcome is officially worn out. In fact, I'm gonna see this guy Farquaad right now and get you all off my land and back where you came from!"

"I'm not the monster here. You are. You and the rest of that fairy tale trash, poisoning my perfect world. Now, tell me! Where are the others?"

While he is saying "going, coming, doing", she drops "g" sound, and he prounces it as /k^mın/. And, the prouncation of "r" sound is also different. As you now, the Americans prounounce "r" which is alveolar trill. Also, while they are speaking it is easy to hear "r" sound especially the ones at the end of the words. Shrek' s prounciation it is not same with the Americans'. While he is saying "monster....", he prounces the word "cover" as /manstı'/. From this aspect, it is same with British. Additionally, there are some nuances between the porounciation of vowels. While he is saying "world", he pronounces it something like this "wıld" not as /w3:ld/, "because" as /bıkoz/....etc. I