|
Scoop Posters
Photos Art
Search for Posters Art Prints, photos and get
results from all the many categories from Amazon including
books, videos, dvds, toys, video games, and more.
|
|
|
Posters Art
Prints Photos collectables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
If for some reason you can't find what the
poster or art print your looking for try using the search boxes
below
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Rating:  -
As a filmmaker, Woody Allen has been in steady decline for 15 years or more. Scoop is not the worst of his latter day movies, but assuredly it is one that will not stand tall among his other productions. At first I hoped it was based on Evelyn Waugh's book of the same title but I soon discovered that it bore no relation to that masterful work. The performances here are acceptable, but the plot itself is weak and features a rather goofy ending (in my view). Hugh Jackman's bad guy was a bit of a stretch, but that's nothing in comparison to Allen's casting of Scarlett Johansson as a mousy college reporter. In no way is she believable in that role. Of course, this is not her fault; it's the director's. Why Woody Allen continues to take the most sought after actors of our day and turn them into androgynous versions of himself for 90 minutes is beyond my reckoning. I've seen it happen many times in the past and he should really allow his characters to drop their neuroses and become people independent of the auteur. Furthermore, Allen's Sid Waterman is a dicey endeavor. He plays Johansson's supposed dad although granddad would be more appropriate. The film would have been better without his character and the jokes he made fell flat. I found his portrayal of England's social structure to be about five decades behind the times. Overall, Scoop is stale and forgettable. This movie will only greatly appeal to those fans who think Woody can do no wrong.
Rating:  -
This is very entertaining, an HBO movie that you watch in the middle of the day when you don't have to work. Also, I do think Hugh Jackman is absolutely sexy...wow...but I think this was a good film to help me pass the time. It is cute and comical, and I don't think it's supposed to be anything more.
Rating:  -
I cared enough about your time to write this review to save you from this movie.
Though the title basically covers it, I did want to address how insipid this film is on every level: extraordinarily bad acting (though Hugh Jackman is passable), transparent and awkward writing, horrible dialogue and direction...anything that can be wrong, was. No, that's not entirely accurate. The production, being set in England, was at least decent to look at.
Take a hint from the cheap looking cover art (that was my first clue but I ignored it) and AVOID this film. There is absolutely ZERO tact, subtlety, and entertainment value. I don't know what movie these other people watched that gave it 3+ stars, because rating it at 1-star is being generous for me. It's nearly as bad as Rollerball (and that's saying something).
Rating:  -
This is one of my favorite movies. Scarlett Johansson and Woody Allen are great together. Very funny. The story keeps you guessing a long time.
Rating: -
This is not vintage Woody Allen but pleasant enough. The young actress, Scarlett Johnasson, made it all worthwhile. The actors did their best but they had little to work with. I was disappointed in the film because I'm a fan of Woody Allen, who has made some great films in the past. I hope Allen hasn't burned out and that we can still look forward to a few more fine films from him.
|
