Log in
Register
Menu
Log in
Register
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
What's On, Transponder and channel support
What's on listings
What's on telly tonight ?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="spiney" data-source="post: 265732" data-attributes="member: 192438"><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'"><span style="font-size: 12px">(<span style="font-family: 'Verdana'"><span style="font-size: 10px">DISCLAIMER. To forums admin: I am solely responsible for the following remarks, in this post. But – of course – delete them entirely if you prefer).</span></span></span></span></p><p></p><p>GENERAL APOLOGY.</p><p></p><p>In above post, I suggested watching the film Life and Death of Peter Sellers, not having seen it, but assuming it would at least be reasonable. Amazingly, it was the worst film I’ve seen in my life (including some by Warhol). After just 2 mins my jaw hit the floor, and stayed there the next 2 hours!</p><p></p><p>It started with a far too manic Goons “recreation”, then we plunged straight into “The League of Gentlemen”. Sellers’ time in small Brit films – a third of his career – wasn’t even mentioned. Then, a “portrayal” of Loren, by somebody not even remotely like her (an Italian accent would at least have helped!). We saw Sellers doing his Clouseau accent for Pink Panther (it didn’t exist before Shot in The Dark), followed by a very nasty on-set speech he never made (if he had, he’d never have worked with Edwards again, instead of doing 4 more films) ……. </p><p></p><p>Except for sound, all production aspects of this film were poor (some inept). Also, all the events portrayed were at least badly wrong, with a number of them being entirely made up (hence, the unusually long and complete legal disclaimer at the end, which was entirely necessary!). Blimey! In my rulebook, if you want to do a “demolition job” on a real person, the actual facts are quite useful ….. </p><p></p><p>The whole thing was curiously uneven, mostly shot like a BBC4 prog on low budget, but at the end was a huge credits list, worthy of a major Hollywood Blockbuster! At a guess – and it’s only a guess – I’d say something went badly wrong during filming, so what started as big budget got finished as small budget, the end result being what was salvaged after a “rescue job”. Otherwise, I can’t explain it.</p><p></p><p>Whatever, this was way below the minimum standard normally required for mainstream television, and should not have been shown (as for the portrayal of Sellers, that was utterly beneath contempt! Not only was it not a "warts and all" portrait, it wasn't even about just the warts). </p><p></p><p>(I've just looked at a few Internet reviews of this, can't believe they're describing the same film!).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="spiney, post: 265732, member: 192438"] [FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]([FONT=Verdana][SIZE=2]DISCLAIMER. To forums admin: I am solely responsible for the following remarks, in this post. But – of course – delete them entirely if you prefer).[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT] GENERAL APOLOGY. In above post, I suggested watching the film Life and Death of Peter Sellers, not having seen it, but assuming it would at least be reasonable. Amazingly, it was the worst film I’ve seen in my life (including some by Warhol). After just 2 mins my jaw hit the floor, and stayed there the next 2 hours! It started with a far too manic Goons “recreation”, then we plunged straight into “The League of Gentlemen”. Sellers’ time in small Brit films – a third of his career – wasn’t even mentioned. Then, a “portrayal” of Loren, by somebody not even remotely like her (an Italian accent would at least have helped!). We saw Sellers doing his Clouseau accent for Pink Panther (it didn’t exist before Shot in The Dark), followed by a very nasty on-set speech he never made (if he had, he’d never have worked with Edwards again, instead of doing 4 more films) ……. Except for sound, all production aspects of this film were poor (some inept). Also, all the events portrayed were at least badly wrong, with a number of them being entirely made up (hence, the unusually long and complete legal disclaimer at the end, which was entirely necessary!). Blimey! In my rulebook, if you want to do a “demolition job” on a real person, the actual facts are quite useful ….. The whole thing was curiously uneven, mostly shot like a BBC4 prog on low budget, but at the end was a huge credits list, worthy of a major Hollywood Blockbuster! At a guess – and it’s only a guess – I’d say something went badly wrong during filming, so what started as big budget got finished as small budget, the end result being what was salvaged after a “rescue job”. Otherwise, I can’t explain it. Whatever, this was way below the minimum standard normally required for mainstream television, and should not have been shown (as for the portrayal of Sellers, that was utterly beneath contempt! Not only was it not a "warts and all" portrait, it wasn't even about just the warts). (I've just looked at a few Internet reviews of this, can't believe they're describing the same film!). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
What's On, Transponder and channel support
What's on listings
What's on telly tonight ?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top