>I'm not sure about you, but when I evaluate a film, I ask
>myself these questions:
>
>1. Does the film succeed in telling a good story ("good" as in
>well structured, clear unless intentionally obfuscated, has a
>beginning, middle, end, and clear plot threads through each
>part?)
>1a. Are the characters successfully drawn?
>1b. Are the situations plausible?
>1c. Does the plot flow from point to point logically and with
>some sense of ease?
>
>2. Does the director's work in staging the film and the
>choices in acting, pacing, etc. enhance the film, hamper the
>film, or keep it at a median level of quality?
>
>3. What is the quality of the acting?
>
>4. What is the quality of the visuals: cinematography,
>production design, art direction, hair/makeup, costuming and,
>if applicable, the special effects?
>
>5. What is the quality of the music or score, if present?
>
>6. What is the quality of the sound mixing and sound design?
>
>7. Do all of these disparate elements work as a whole to
>present a cohesive picture?
>
>Here's Purple Rain:
>1. No. The story is all over the place, and the high variance
>of the plot in earlier drafts bears witness to the fact that
>this movie was less about telling a story with Prince as the
>lead than it was about just promoting Prince.
>1a. No. See above. Prince's clique is generally cast to play
>heightened versions of themselves, but this ends up resulting
>in either throwaway characterizations (Wendy and Lisa) or
>inconsistent characterizations (Morris Day).
>1b. Uh, generally.
>1c. Not quite. Film meanders all up and around the plot, which
>is essentially an A-story of boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl,
>boy-wins-girl back and a B-story that's a modernized variation
>on the mortgage on the farm/let's put on a show plot (see
>also, "Can't Stop the Music", which is sort of like "Purple
>Rain" for the Village People, but even worse)
>
>2. The director is really there to make Prince look cool,
>everything else be damned to hell. He succeeds at that task,
>but the rest of the film suffers from inattention and a lack
>of focus that makes it feel long, long, long.
>
>3. Oh, come now.
>
>4. Visuals are decent, save for some awful location
>night-shots.
>
>5. Oh, come now, but for the opposite reason: one of the best
>song scores ever.
>
>6. No complaints about sound quality
>
>7. Hell naw, they don't!