Posts Topics Forums Images
Search videos from message boards Videos Search messages from microblogs Microblogs Search messages from imdb.com Imdb Search messages from yuku.com Yuku Search messages from lefora.com (free forums) Lefora
My account: Login | Sign Up
Loading... 

Thread: Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated so low?

Started 1 month, 3 weeks ago by matthijs_013
I know everyone has a different taste, but a 6.0 just isn't right. Is it because of the accuracy? I really don't get it.
Site: IMDb :: Main Boards  IMDb :: Main Boards - site profile
Forum: Classic Film  Classic Film - forum profile
Total authors: 4 authors
Total thread posts: 5 posts
Thread activity: no new posts during last week
Domain info for: imdb.com

Other posts in this thread:

clore_2 replied 1 month, 3 weeks ago
I don't know if the inaccuracy plays a part - if it did, My Darling Clementine would be rated similarly. It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me

Dr_Miklos_Rozsa replied 1 month, 3 weeks ago
I watched about 20 minutes of it on the Fox Movie Channel two years ago and I'm sorry to say that Gene did not give one of her best performances in the film. After all, this was one of her earliest ventures into screen stardom. Plus, I agree with the film's mention in The Chronicle of the Cinema that Gene was miscast. "I do write music for people, not for computers." - Dr. MiklxF3;s RxF3;...

clore_2 replied 1 month, 3 weeks ago
Tierney was miscast, but who would want to see a young Marjorie Main type in the part? http://www.bellestarr-realty.com/Images/Site/Photo -BelleStarr2.jpg Judy Canova would have been better casting. You could say that Warren Beatty was miscast as Clyde Barrow, certainly they looked nothing alike and Beatty didn't help by keeping his 60s hair style. It ain't easy being green, or ...

timshelboy replied 1 month, 3 weeks ago
because it sucks. In fact a 6 is far too good for it. A 3 is being generous. Tell mama, Tell mama all....

 

Top contributing authors

Name
Posts
clore_2
2
user's latest post:
Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated...
Published (2009-11-08 19:45:00)
Tierney was miscast, but who would want to see a young Marjorie Main type in the part? http://www.bellestarr-realty.com/Images/Site/Photo-BelleStarr2.jpg Judy Canova would have been better casting. You could say that Warren Beatty was miscast as Clyde Barrow, certainly they looked nothing alike and Beatty didn't help by keeping his 60s hair style. It ain't easy being green, or anything else, other than to be me
matthijs_013
1
user's latest post:
Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated...
Published (2009-11-08 12:50:00)
I know everyone has a different taste, but a 6.0 just isn't right. Is it because of the accuracy? I really don't get it.
Dr_Miklos_Rozsa
1
user's latest post:
Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated...
Published (2009-11-08 18:25:00)
I watched about 20 minutes of it on the Fox Movie Channel two years ago and I'm sorry to say that Gene did not give one of her best performances in the film. After all, this was one of her earliest ventures into screen stardom. Plus, I agree with the film's mention in The Chronicle of the Cinema that Gene was miscast. "I do write music for people, not for computers." - Dr. Miklós Rózsa (1907-1995)
timshelboy
1
user's latest post:
Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated...
Published (2009-11-09 02:54:00)
because it sucks. In fact a 6 is far too good for it. A 3 is being generous. Tell mama, Tell mama all....

Related threads on "IMDb :: Main Boards":

Related threads on other sites:

Thread profile page for "Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated so low?" on http://www.imdb.com. This report page is a snippet summary view from a single thread "Why is Belle Starr (1941) rated so low?", located on the Message Board at http://www.imdb.com. This thread profile page shows the thread statistics for: Total Authors, Total Thread Posts, and Thread Activity