Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.PCS 1/10/84; site ahutb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!drutx!ahuta!ahutb!leeper
From: leeper@ahutb.UUCP (m.r.leeper)
Newsgroups: net.movies,net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: LADYHAWKE
Message-ID: <685@ahutb.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Apr-85 20:48:10 EST
Article-I.D.: ahutb.685
Posted: Wed Apr 17 20:48:10 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Apr-85 05:22:05 EST
References: <664@ahutb.UUCP> <144@timeinc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 66
Xref: watmath net.movies:6110 net.sf-lovers:7082

<this message may have been somehow screwed up in a previous posting>

 >We saw LADYHAWKE this weekend.  I must take issue with
 >several of your points, and add a couple of comments, after
 >reading your fine review, Mark.

Well, I can't complain if you take issue and in the same breath call it
a "fine" review.  Thanks.

 >
 >First, on Michelle Pfeiffer as Isabeau: We thought she was
 >extraordinarily appropriate in the role.  She's beautiful,
 >impetuous, strong-willed, and, yes, anachronistic in these
 >strengths and in her power and her sexuality.  
 
That is not what I objected to.  She just seems too American somehow.
It doesn't help that I recently saw INTO THE NIGHT, but her accent
seems all wrong.   The makeup may have been a strong contributory
factor, also.  She just does not sound Medieval when she talks.  Rutger
Hauer, carried it off and I think Matthew Broderick was not too far out
of place.  I just never believed her character as coming out of that
period.
 
 >Your review was more than just a mild spoiler,
 >incidentally-- perhaps I'm slow, but one of the most
 >marvelous parts of the film was in slowly making the
 >connection between the hawk and Isabeau, and between the man
 >and the wolf.  I'm glad I didn't know about that before I
 >saw it.
 
By the time I saw the film I saw the film I had heard the premise in
presentations at science fiction conventions, in ads, on TV's At The
Movies, in a presentation at a science fiction society by Joan Vinge
who is writing the novel, etc.  Also I contend it is almost impossible
to review the film without giving that much away.

Incidentally, none of these excuses would I find acceptable if the
tables were turned and I had read just the USENET review before seeing
the film.  What can I say?  I was desensitized by the advance publicity
and I flubbed it.
 
 >And you didn't mention the horse--Goodness, that horse--the
 >black stallion--was just incredible.  Perhaps, given your
 >other cast-related comments, you could at least have given
 >credit to someone, somewhere, for having made a most
 >extraordinary casting decision when they found that horse.

Not a detail I am likely to notice.  I thought that the horse looked
good in BLACK STALLION, this one did not impress me so much, but it
could be I just didn't notice.

 >
 >Verdict: Don't miss it.  Enjoy it.  Especially with your
 >SO--for the scene at the end is perhaps one of the most
 >romantic and delightful scenes ever filmed, although it's simple.
 
I actually thought this scene was a bit drawn out and for reasons I
won't mention here, unrealistic.  (Well, it is mostly for what most of
the people are doing or not doing in this scene.)  Incidentally this
last paragraph of yours is something of a minor spoiler in itself.

I have to agree with your verdict.  I was impressed with the film.
Thank you for following up on my review.

				Mark Leeper
				...ihnp4!ahutb!leeper