| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| ci�nas |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 12:43:14
Just reviewed Neil Simon�s The Sunshine Boys. Apart from being surprised at how few reviews an amusing film like this has been given � mine was only the sixteenth � I was confused by several of them.
In case you haven�t seen it, in the film Matthau & Burns play an erstwhile vaudeville double act. They reunite as old men to perform a one-off TV special. Like Matthau & Lemmon in The Odd Couple, they don�t get along, & the film is full of similarly waspish Jewish humour.
I have seen the film a few times & can�t recall anything in it involving theft in general or bank robbery in particular. I can�t, therefore, understand the relevance of these reviews:
�Old men rob bank.�
�Geriatric gangsters burgle bank.�
�Stealing geezers: K�s funny?�
The second half of the third review above definitely makes sense in relation to The Sunshine Boys, but otherwise they seem to be referring to a different film, one that by the sound of it I�m glad I missed.
(Another review � �Senior citizens supplement pensions� � fits, sort of, although it�s a bit of a stretch because it�s such an oblique way of describing what the film�s about.)
Usually I�m charitably inclined to assume that reviews I don�t get are due to some deficiency in me rather than in the review, but I�m genuinely baffled here.
Can anyone enlighten me? |
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/01/2008 : 22:06:51
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Oooh! I see. Ah, and here's that review.
But... why on earth did they make a remake of that film?
You heard of money?
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 06/01/2008 : 21:33:50
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
I'm the guy who wrote "Stealing geezers: K's funny?" I meant scene-stealing, which they do to each other constantly, but that would have been Not 4.
Since it's hyphenated (and correctly so), it would have been four. |
| randall |
Posted - 06/01/2008 : 19:48:07
I'm the guy who wrote "Stealing geezers: K's funny?" I meant scene-stealing, which they do to each other constantly, but that would have been Not 4. Should I still zap it? |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 05/31/2008 : 08:49:34
Oooh! I see. Ah, and here's that review. Better than I remembered it, actually. Now I have to write a new one for this remake.
But... why on earth did they make a remake of that film? Matthau and Burns were marvelous in the original. Not that I have anything against Woody Allen or Peter Falk. Still, seems to me two little guys fighting wouldn't be as funny as one little guy and one big, hulking guy fighting.
|
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 17:42:44
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Um... what happened to all the reviews? I was sure I had one there. One that I clearly remember submitting one that was something like "Lewis, Clark: reunion exhibition." (playing on the famous US explorers Lewis & Clark, and the two characters in the movie are called Lewis and Clark), or something like that. I know because I have this film in my "Simon says..." accolade and now there are no achievers there (and I had gotten it myself already).
CL - there are two versions -- the one Salopian added yesterday is a remake with Woody Allen. Your review is still there for the original film starring George Burns and Walter Matthau.
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 17:30:10
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
There's an updated version, but as far as I can tell the plot is basically the same.
Um... what happened to all the reviews?
Er, I only added it today... |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 17:13:46
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
There's an updated version, but as far as I can tell the plot is basically the same.
Um... what happened to all the reviews? I was sure I had one there. One that I clearly remember submitting one that was something like "Lewis, Clark: reunion exhibition." (playing on the famous US explorers Lewis & Clark, and the two characters in the movie are called Lewis and Clark), or something like that. I know because I have this film in my "Simon says..." accolade and now there are no achievers there (and I had gotten it myself already).
|
| Ali |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 15:18:59
I think the "bank robbery" reviews were in reference to Going in Style, Martin Brest's flick from '78 or '79 starring George Burns, Lee Strasberg and Art Carney as three old friends who decide to rob a bank because they're tired of being old and poor. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 15:05:02
There's an updated version, but as far as I can tell the plot is basically the same. |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 13:44:52
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
yep, that sure is strange. The only Simon film I know with a bank robbery is It Seems Like Old Times with Chevy Chase and Goldie Hawn.
Walter Matthau does a bank robbery in "Charlie Varrick" and, in the end, the guy chasing after him BURNS, so maybe that's the confusion.
|
| benj clews |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 13:34:38
I've certainly declined the bank robbing reviews. Still thinking about the others. |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 12:54:41
yep, that sure is strange. The only Simon film I know with a bank robbery is It Seems Like Old Times with Chevy Chase and Goldie Hawn.
|
