'Music and Lyrics' - High-Def Digest

[jed]

Peter's review of the Drew Barrymore/Hugh Grant romantic comedy 'Music and Lyrics' is up. He says Warner has delivered perhaps the best Blu-ray that could be expected for such a "pastry-puff" of a movie -- the transfer is very attractive, and the soundtrack is fine. Save this one for date night.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/musicandlyrics.html

[Detroit Tigers Fan]

Any movie with the word 'music' in it should have at least four stars audio quality.

[kalel1974]

My wife and I spent the weekend with some friends and we rented this movie,we both thought it was one of the worst movies we have ever seen.One of the biggest waste of film ever.

[vital22]

I am not sure how this guy got to review movies his comments are inane, there is nothing at all nifty about this movie. THe ending has the same effect of sticking one's finger down one's throat... vomit.

[kalel1974]

Originally Posted by vital22

I am not sure how this guy got to review movies his comments are inane, there is nothing at all nifty about this movie. THe ending has the same effect of sticking one's finger down one's throat... vomit.

I agree this movie is a serious turd.

[san]

This a romantic comedy. It's not an Oscar contender. It's not some whizzy special effects and cinematography adaption of a graphic novel. In it's genre, it's one of the best films in recent years. That usually happens with Drew Barrymore. If she makes a romantic comedy, it's usually one of the best in recent years. With the addition of Hugh Grant as the male lead, Barrymore doesn't have to carry the film or help pull the best romantic lead performance possible out of he co-star.

I know, I know. Most of you have never seen -- or least not liked -- anything shot before 1965 that isn't Hitchcock or some sort of quirky cult flick, like some Ed Wood thing. But this is a classic romantic comedy in the vein of Hollywood's sweet, soppy and, yes, melodramatic golden years. If you don't like these types of films, please go see "The 300" again. Otherwise, you'll recognize that Barrymore will probably be remembered as the Hepburn, A. not K., of her generation. This is her best effort in her natural genre yet.

[kalel1974]

Originally Posted by san

This a romantic comedy. It's not an Oscar contender. It's not some whizzy special effects and cinematography adaption of a graphic novel. In it's genre, it's one of the best films in recent years. That usually happens with Drew Barrymore. If she makes a romantic comedy, it's usually one of the best in recent years. With the addition of Hugh Grant as the male lead, Barrymore doesn't have to carry the film or help pull the best romantic lead performance possible out of he co-star.

I know, I know. Most of you have never seen -- or least not liked -- anything shot before 1965 that isn't Hitchcock or some sort of quirky cult flick, like some Ed Wood thing. But this is a classic romantic comedy in the vein of Hollywood's sweet, soppy and, yes, melodramatic golden years. If you don't like these types of films, please go see "The 300" again. Otherwise, you'll recognize that Barrymore will probably be remembered as the Hepburn, A. not K., of her generation. This is her best effort in her natural genre yet.

Actually I love Drew Barrymore and just about everyting she does. I also love a good romantic comedy. This is a forum and my opinion on this movie is that it's a turd. Compared to the rest of her movies it just does not stack up.So before you go telling everyone to go see 300 again know a little about them by reading some of their posts.

[san]

Originally Posted by kalel1974

This is a forum and my opinion on this movie is that it's a turd. ... So before you go telling everyone to go see 300 again know a little about them by reading some of their posts.

When you call a movie a turd without any objective criticism or supporting argument, and your user name is is a variation of the Superman comic book character's real forename, I can make some assumptions about what I know about you. I could be wrong about you, but that you are a thoughtful movie buff with an interest in a broad range of genres goes against all evidence to the contrary.

But in the interest of fairness, what is your favorite Drew Barrymore movie, romance or otherwise? (Please don't say E.T.; it would be funny, but it wouldn't really serve the purpose of establishing perhaps why you like Drew Barrymore's romantic comedies, but just not this one.)

Oh, also admit if you have you are a Hughist -- bigoted against Hugh Grant -- because there a lot of Hughists out there and that would explain it. Also, if you care to, toss in that objective criticism -- with, you know, actual details -- regarding this movie.

And, Clark, please note that any sarcasm you detect in this response is intended as a mere light-hearted form of polemics and not at all seriously derogatory -- not in the least. I'm rather glad you bothered to keep up the discussion, period. Now you can get back to "The 300".

[vital22]

"I know, I know. Most of you have never seen -- or least not liked -- anything shot before 1965 that isn't Hitchcock or some sort of quirky cult flick, like some Ed Wood thing."

Thanks for the film education "Eisenstein". the point is you are defending a Trite and contrived film with poor casting and no chemistry between the leads. Kalel and I agree and you don't. A good romantic comedy with Drew Barrymore is "Never Been Kissed" the problem is she keeps trying to make the same movie over and over with different leading men.

Hugh Grant does very well with dry, intelligent dialogue the english films Like 4 weddings, notting hill, about a boy and love actually all of which are terriffic films. Music and Lyrics is a poor 10 minute concept drawn out into a feature.

There is nothing Nifty about it, and I seriously question the use of the word "Nifty" at all... why don't we bring back swell and neat too....

[san]

Originally Posted by vital22

"I know, I know. Most of you have never seen -- or least not liked -- anything shot before 1965 that isn't Hitchcock or some sort of quirky cult flick, like some Ed Wood thing."

Thanks for the film education "Eisenstein". the point is you are defending a Trite and contrived film with poor casting and no chemistry between the leads. Kalel and I agree and you don't. A good romantic comedy with Drew Barrymore is "Never Been Kissed" the problem is she keeps trying to make the same movie over and over with different leading men.

Hugh Grant does very well with dry, intelligent dialogue the english films Like 4 weddings, notting hill, about a boy and love actually all of which are terriffic films. Music and Lyrics is a poor 10 minute concept drawn out into a feature.

There is nothing Nifty about it, and I seriously question the use of the word "Nifty" at all... why don't we bring back swell and neat too....

That's the classic Hollywood model for female leads in stock romances: same movie over and over with different leading men. It works with her. And it is a stock romance. Solid but run-of-the-mill screenplay directed in serviceable if, well, stock fashion. I didn't say it was high art. Mere enjoyable entertainment, yes. "Turd", no. But that's what Barrymore does; I don't think she's planning on reprising any early Meryl Streep roles.

Grant fit his role. I immediately thought of Andrew Ridgley in the first couple minutes of the film, after the opening music video sequence -- listen to Sarah Nixey on Black Box Recorder's track "Andrew Ridgley" if you want to see, or rather hear, what I mean. I disagree on the lack of chemistry between the leads. It was, really, the creeping sort of pedestrian attraction that is more human than the usual film effort. If you mean sexual chemistry, I'd agree. But this movie is not a sexual romance; it's a fairy tale.

Finally, as you shot across my bow, I'll return in kind: anyone capitalizing in the English language adjectives like "nifty" and "trite" is likely not qualified to hand out advice on prose style to this review's author. My stars.

[kalel1974]

Originally Posted by san

When you call a movie a turd without any objective criticism or supporting argument, and your user name is is a variation of the Superman comic book character's real forename, I can make some assumptions about what I know about you. I could be wrong about you, but that you are a thoughtful movie buff with an interest in a broad range of genres goes against all evidence to the contrary.

But in the interest of fairness, what is your favorite Drew Barrymore movie, romance or otherwise? (Please don't say E.T.; it would be funny, but it wouldn't really serve the purpose of establishing perhaps why you like Drew Barrymore's romantic comedies, but just not this one.)

Oh, also admit if you have you are a Hughist -- bigoted against Hugh Grant -- because there a lot of Hughists out there and that would explain it. Also, if you care to, toss in that objective criticism -- with, you know, actual details -- regarding this movie.

And, Clark, please note that any sarcasm you detect in this response is intended as a mere light-hearted form of polemics and not at all seriously derogatory -- not in the least. I'm rather glad you bothered to keep up the discussion, period. Now you can get back to "The 300".

I can tell sarcasm when I here it,my post was also a light hearted joke,hense the .You are probably going to laugh at me but I think that the Wedding Singer would have to be my favorite Drew flick. I can't say that I hate Hugh but I would have to say he seems a whole lot older than Drew and just didnt seem to fit in this movie.I am also a 70s child so I have fond memories of the 80s and the music in it.The music in this movie was so bad that it took me right out of the movie, and yes I know that is probably how the director intended it. Sorry if I came off sounding harsh.YOU DIDN'T LIKE 300?WHAT THE HELL!!!!!!!