What can I say, the first half is a good movie. Especially in the scene at the female star's house, it's very Billy Wilder. The narration is smooth, the language is concise, and several camera changes clearly explain the female star's character, messy private life and the personalities of lovers. Amy Adams is just right to play this kind of silly, scheming pretty girl. The rough-and-tumble Nicole Kidman plays a character that can't figure out a detailed, layered role.
In the subsequent scenes, this kind of comic-like characterization is very comfortable to watch. The big timeline, plot, and small jokes are all well arranged. Although there is a premonition that "the three views must be very positive" as soon as the handsome poor pianist appears, the story does not disappoint. As for Miss Pittgrew, is it really okay for you, author, to call her Queenievale? Ha ha ha ha. But the character's setting is very interesting. She was like the opposite of a female star's life, with almost all the qualities that Miss Deresia and that Miss Myrtle lacked. Putting it together and watching it live is the effect of a fun mirror. With such a comparison, it is difficult for the story not to look good.
But the reason why it's half the Billy Wilder problem is here too. The story is placed at a time when there are obviously dozens of permutations and combinations, and I chose the most stable one. Deresia's choice of poor pianist was almost inevitable. The other two who said they loved her were a bear child who didn't have enough fun, and the other was completely lustful. Deresia was stupid but not stupid, and always knew that pianists loved her. What else is there to say? Although the handling is simple and rude, it is almost a Hollywood romance in the 1980s, but there is an explanation - thanks to Emma and LEE for having enough colors and beautiful smiles. But the other pair was just too disappointing. Miss Pittgrew's relationship with Joe has plenty of growth and possibilities. In the beginning, the mutual test (about the scarf) was vaguely ambiguous and very European, why did the United States suddenly open up when Myrtle gave the showdown? There is no problem with the praise of actors. Pittgrew, who has been pursing his lips and politely withdrew, has done a good job of showing the daughter of a self-respecting priest. Joe used to be a very authentic, cold and cynical middle-aged man. . As for his running to the station to find Pittgrew, he was completely caught up in the empty talk of emotional supremacy, which is as ridiculous as Jane Eyre going to St. John's cousin to find the meaning of life.
Joe's temperament has aroused a lot of interest in me. This person is very sophisticated, intelligent, and has a high self-esteem. He knows the world of people but likes to play tricks on them. Kind of like Wilde's Sir Henry. His choice of Miss Myrtle as his fiancée made perfect sense - and it certainly wasn't out of love. But the mean, arrogant Miss Myrtle obviously didn't understand, even though she herself had said that we were right. If she really knew they were just right, there was absolutely no need to be afraid of Joe finding out that she was having an affair. A man like Joe who gets married for the sake of getting married doesn't care if she cheats or not, but cares about whether she handles it beautifully and whether everyone looks good in face. Myrtle got the point completely wrong. Going unbeaten is simply not normal. But such a person suddenly proposed to Miss Pittgrew, whom she had met several times. . . Who believes? ? Shouldn't it be here that a real contractual marriage in Yuanmeng Revisiting is more appropriate?
Billy Wilder's story will make people laugh, find it unexpected and even absurd but there is always a reason. The reason why this is half Billy Wilder is also here. The drama is unreasonable, and it loses the strength to make people laugh.
Sure enough to pass the time. Especially the whole film is very good looking and the soundtrack is great. And Lee is so sweet~~
View more about Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day reviews
