Threaded Order Chronological Order
| How Angela Lansbury and Stephen Sondheim Came to Appear in ‘Glass Onion’ | |
| Posted by: Unhookthestars 01:38 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Link below. | |
| Link | How Angela Lansbury and Stephen Sondheim Came to Appear in ‘Glass Onion’ |
| reply to this message | |
| re: How Angela Lansbury and Stephen Sondheim Came to Appear in ‘Glass Onion’ | |
| Last Edit: WaymanWong 06:34 pm EST 12/26/22 | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 06:14 pm EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: How Angela Lansbury and Stephen Sondheim Came to Appear in ‘Glass Onion’ - Unhookthestars 01:38 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| The link below at ArtDaily.com goes to the N.Y. Times article itself (without a fee). It was fun to see Sondheim and Lansbury's cameos, but I found the plot in ''Glass Onion'' so ridiculously contrived, and I just couldn't buy Daniel Craig's ludicrous accent as Colonel Sanders, er, Benoit Blanc. When it comes to classy, star-studded mysteries, you can't beat ''Murder on the Orient Express'' (1974), directed by Sidney Lumet, with Albert Finney, and scored by Richard Rodney Bennett. Kenneth Branagh's 2017 remake can't compare. And wasn't there a stage version heading for B'way? Someday, I need to catch ''The Last of Sheila'' (on maybe TCM?). I wonder if that would've made a good musical. |
|
| Link | ArtDaily.com: How Angela Lansbury and Stephen Sondheim Came to Be in 'Glass Onion' |
| reply to this message | |
| I was surprise to see them | |
| Posted by: dramedy 01:51 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: How Angela Lansbury and Stephen Sondheim Came to Appear in ‘Glass Onion’ - Unhookthestars 01:38 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| And wondered if they were cg. I don’t subscribe to nytimes so I’ll never know. I didn’t care for the movie that much. I thought the first one was much better. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| I guess I won't be | |
| Posted by: Ann 04:06 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I was surprise to see them - dramedy 01:51 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| And I was disappointed in the first one. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I guess I won't be | |
| Posted by: TheOtherOne 10:22 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I guess I won't be - Ann 04:06 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| The sequel is an improvement, but it's much too long. The Sondheim/Lansbury appearance is mercifully early. Gimmicky as it is, it would probably have been just as good to see them even if they hadn't passed on. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I guess I won't be | |
| Posted by: lowwriter 01:29 pm EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I guess I won't be - TheOtherOne 10:22 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I found the 2nd movie a big disappointment. I watched it in a theater. The cast was good. But the mystery elements weren’t that interesting. The writer-director is no Agatha Christie. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside | |
| Posted by: dramedy 11:49 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I guess I won't be - TheOtherOne 10:22 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I guess he didn’t talk much in the first one so that accent wasn’t as grating. And someone that allergic to pineapple juice would carry an epi pen. I thought he was the killer near the beginning so rather obvious. The only surprise was the twin sister. I felt the first movie was almost as good as Agatha Christie story—this was not. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside | |
| Posted by: StanS 04:06 pm EST 12/27/22 | |
| In reply to: I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside - dramedy 11:49 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I agree with you that the first one was much better. Glass Onion was entertaining but the ending was totally unsatisfying. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside | |
| Last Edit: TheOtherOne 10:33 am EST 12/28/22 | |
| Posted by: TheOtherOne 10:20 am EST 12/28/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside - StanS 04:06 pm EST 12/27/22 | |
|
|
|
| I do think it’s marginally better. The first had a good cast but wasn’t quite glib enough to work as parody or intriguing enough to be suspenseful, though it ended well. The second started well, had an impressive twist and a cast that largely* knew when to wink and when to be dead serious, but it dragged on for too long. I wish him well next time out, I love and miss good mysteries. *I don’t think Kate Hudson pulls this off. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside | |
| Posted by: TheOtherOne 11:58 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I’m surprised you think it’s better Spoiler inside - dramedy 11:49 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| I did not like the first one at all. I thought the killer was obvious in both, but found the overall mystery more engaging in "Glass Onion." I didn't think Craig's accent was as bad this time, frankly, but that's subjective. My only serious complaint about this film is that, as I said, it is much too long. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I guess I won't be | |
| Posted by: Delvino 10:02 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I guess I won't be - Ann 04:06 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Same; lasted 35 minutes through the 2nd one. Among other things, this ended up my year for Daniel Craig fatigue. Haven't gotten over his Thane of Glamis exiting to open a beer can in the wings. Wait. Maybe that means I have Sam Gold fatigue. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: I was surprise to see them | |
| Posted by: Unhookthestars 02:04 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: I was surprise to see them - dramedy 01:51 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Here’s a link that should work without a Times subscription. | |
| Link | Paywall-free link |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| It didn’t work | |
| Posted by: dramedy 11:51 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I was surprise to see them - Unhookthestars 02:04 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for trying. I just don’t read enough articles for $1 a week | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| One last attempt to share the article for free | |
| Last Edit: Unhookthestars 06:58 pm EST 12/26/22 | |
| Posted by: Unhookthestars 06:57 pm EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: It didn’t work - dramedy 11:51 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| Crossing my fingers (link below): | |
| Link | Sondheim & Lansbury |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Natasha Lyonne | |
| Posted by: TheOtherOne 07:32 am EST 12/26/22 | |
| In reply to: re: I was surprise to see them - Unhookthestars 02:04 am EST 12/26/22 | |
|
|
|
| The article is a must-read if only for her first quote. Priceless. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.078271 seconds.