tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724537973285198834.post8016570846568365932..comments2024-01-29T10:56:03.268-05:00Comments on My Movies, My Words (from Abbott to Ziggy): GANDHIEric F.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05062980077091387176noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724537973285198834.post-62545469013417028062012-02-15T11:17:53.018-05:002012-02-15T11:17:53.018-05:00I have nothing but praise for the work of the film...I have nothing but praise for the work of the film makers who turned this story into a moving motion picture. The history alone makes it worth seeing. In 1982 I had believed that Paul Newman was finally going to win his long deserved first Academy Award for "The Verdict", as we walked out of Gandhi, I turned to my wife and said, "Newman better make another good movie next year because that guy was fantastic." However, I am one of those who still believes that E.T. was the most unjustly denied film in Academy History. Seriousness is a disease that infects film goers and sometimes allows them to see the above average as great. If repeatability is used as a measure, this comparison is no contest. The collective performances of the kids in E.T. match up well with Ben Kingsley, and the storytelling is also superior. I would never demean those who find Gandhi to be their cup of tea, but if you compare the c.v. of the two directors, again, there is not any doubt. Gandhi sits in a group of Award Winners that are serious and good quality but not memorable (All the Kings Men, The Last Emperor,The Life of Emile Zola, The Hurt Locker), E.T. is sitting next to the contenders that remain with us all of our lives,(Jaws, Mary Poppins, The Wizard of Oz, Citizen Kane).Richard Kirkhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16428986542891346618noreply@blogger.com