Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Angela Channing" data-source="post: 353164" data-attributes="member: 33">Babylon (2023)<img src="https://www.saltypopcorn.co.uk/film-images/babylon.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="width: 351px" />A film about Hollywood during the period when it was transitioning from silent pictures to talkies. Singing In The Rain was set during the same era and covered some of the same ground and did it much better. This film sadly falls short. Instead of attempting something fresh, Babylon copies portions of the plot and even some of the dialogue from Singing In The Rain. The main difference between the 2 films is there are no songs in Babylon but instead there is violence and debauchery. It&#039;s not all bad, the cinematography is stunning and I particularly liked how the camera moved constantly throughout many of the scenes. The film is lavish and spectacular but it was difficult to care for any of the characters even though they were well acted. It was also too long at 3 hours. I wouldn&#039;t mind it I felt the time was used well (after all this film is shorter than The Sound of Music and Gone With The Wind) but it just felt self-indulgent and in need of more judicious editing.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Angela Channing, post: 353164, member: 33"] [B]Babylon (2023)[/B] [IMG width="351px"]https://www.saltypopcorn.co.uk/film-images/babylon.jpg[/IMG] A film about Hollywood during the period when it was transitioning from silent pictures to talkies.[I] Singing In The Rain [/I]was set during the same era and covered some of the same ground and did it much better. This film sadly falls short. Instead of attempting something fresh, [I]Babylon [/I]copies portions of the plot and even some of the dialogue from[I] Singing In The Rain[/I]. The main difference between the 2 films is there are no songs in [I]Babylon [/I]but instead there is violence and debauchery. It's not all bad, the cinematography is stunning and I particularly liked how the camera moved constantly throughout many of the scenes. The film is lavish and spectacular but it was difficult to care for any of the characters even though they were well acted. It was also too long at 3 hours. I wouldn't mind it I felt the time was used well (after all this film is shorter than [I]The Sound of Music[/I] and [I]Gone With The Wind[/I]) but it just felt self-indulgent and in need of more judicious editing. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played JR Ewing?