Jersey Boys: Some Reviews

Alonso Duralde, in THE WRAP, gives this movie a mixed review. The "core audience" will get a "nice, pleasant, entertaining time at the movies," but it all feels uninspired to him, an overblown episode of "Behind the Music."

Mixed reviews seem to be the fate of Jersey Boys. Roger Ebert, of the notorious thumb, says the mob-related material in the movie seems both endless and lifeless. The movie becomes worthwhile, though, when it focuses on the chemistry among the band members.

Andrew Barker, writing in VARIETY, says the movie is "effective at conveying the joy of sudden harmonic epiphany" in some scenes, but in others the leads don't seem to be "surfing the same wave."

Chris Nashawaty for CNN Entertainment, gave it one of the least positive reviews I've seen. It was in his view a "one-dimensional stage show" to begin with and gains nothing from adaptation. But he acknowledges that the project is saved from wretchedness by "Eastwood's measured doses of directorial playfulness."

I'll cite just one more example. Dana Stevens of SLATE praised the "freshness and immediacy" of the performance scenes. But she clearly preferred the stage version, and she regrets the "contextless blank" of both -- the way nearly the whole musical world of the 60s is ignored outside of the Valli-centric bubble.

Okay, I'm copping out by not giving an opinion of my own. I get one cheap and easy blog post out of it.

Comments

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge. We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave. First, Plato is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability. I only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere. At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

Search This Blog