wendy
Ant
Just happy being myself!!!
Posts: 23 
|
Post by wendy on May 7, 2008 23:42:58 GMT
I never saw it but sounds funny!
|
|
|
|
Post by pinkadilly on May 21, 2008 17:35:27 GMT
well i guess all of them are worth seeing at least once!
|
|
|
|
Post by yannickthejoker on May 25, 2008 1:53:12 GMT
Yes, Curse is worth seeing once. And then never again. I never liked it. It just really lacks the Sellers factor. Still, the 2006 film is better than this turd here. Roger Moore is good in his part but overall it all really falls flat. See, I can't make reviews so I always just summon op my feelings in two sentences. I wish I had the same talent for it as some of you guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by georgelytton on Jun 30, 2008 15:42:14 GMT
I disagree. While CURSE is by no means good, the 2006 film is ever worse.
If anything, this film tried to move on without Sellers, as Edwards best of all, that as long as Sellers was dead, there would be no real Clouseau. Period.
Of course, they failed terribly while at that, but that, is another story.
|
|
|
|
Post by panther67 on Aug 4, 2008 18:08:24 GMT
PP(06) is better than Curse in every way. Martin is better than Wass, and the story in 06 was better too.
I do think this was better than Trail. but only because it's part 2 of that, and wraps it up.
Wass isn't too bad. What is worst about this movie is the story, I think. Basically the same as Trail, but with Wass doing what the woman reporter did in Trail.
What did confuse me in this movie was the ending, when Wass 1st encounters Moore, and says, "it's you!". Now what did he mean? Who is this "you" he refers to? Then he asks for Moore's autograph, and he gives him a photo of Clouseau to sign. Now what was that all about? Did he realize Moore, Turk was really Clouseau? This left me confused, wondering if Wass knew what was going on, and falsley reported Clouseau dead.
Carl
|
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Aug 4, 2008 19:16:29 GMT
i always figured Wass thought it was Roger Moore...
|
|
|
|
Post by panther67 on Aug 4, 2008 21:49:17 GMT
Was Roger Moore's image in the movie meant to be Roger Moore the actor, that the characters in the movie would know? And why then did Wass give him a photo of Peter Sellers to sign for his autograph?
Carl
|
|
|
|
Post by Clouseau on Aug 6, 2008 0:19:44 GMT
i can't explain why Wass had him sign the photo of Clouseau, unless it just happened to be the only thing he figured he had worth getting a signature on... that's a weird one for me... but i honestly believe that Wass' character thought that Clouseau was really Roger Moore, the actor, rather than the other way around... it doesn't totally make sense, but it's the closest thing i can figure that makes sense, though i'm willing to be open-minded about that... maybe this question deserves its own debate thread over in the films section... that way this thread can get back to just being reviews... EDIT: thread created |
|
