| Home | Movies A-M | Movies N-Z | News |
Sometimes I don't feel like writing full reviews, or I can't, or there's not enough time, so short reviews will go here. Mostly older movies will be here.
Amarcord: 4/10Fellini's autobiographical film (although he denies this), and the first one of his I've seen. I'm less than overwhelmed. It's a series of vignettes about Italy in the 1930s. All have absolutely nothing to do with each other and don't flow together at all. The characters kind of are related, but you can't remember one from the beginning of the movie that comes back two very long hours later. The beginning is interesting (before you realize it's going nowhere), and it tricks you into believing it's interesting. Things just occur for no reason. If a guy in a tree screaming "I want a woman" is your idea of a good foreign film, then Amarcord is your pick. But after seeing this movie, my expectations for 8 1/2 have gone considerably down.
One of those movies that when you probably read the book, you'll like the movie more. I happen to have read the book, which was very good, and the movie is basically the same. A probe in space falls to earth, destroying an entire town. A group of four must find out what the virus is and how it killed the town. It's engaging, entertaining, but has the late 60's feel (it came out in 1971). Although it's a little long, it still provides a good mystery, but when it's finally revealed, it's in such a nonchalant way it doesn't get across to you.
The Battle of Algiers: 7/10A newly restored print (and awesome looking subtitles) of this "classic" movie (which I had never heard of before I saw) is about, obviously, the Algerian revolution. Both sides are shown, with their viewpoints fully realized on both sides. Mostly interesting (I did not know anything about it) and some exciting moments, but is too drawn out. It has some great moments in it, but weak characterization and, basically, lack of flowing story to hold it together, really hinders it. Still, I now know more about the Algerian revolution than I did before I saw the movie, so I'm not really complaining.
The most overrated in Christopher Guest's trilogy of mockuentaries (Waiting for Guffman, A Mighty Wind, it's not as funny or consistant but still offers some good laughs. Guest's usual crew comes in, and the funniest yet again is Fred Willard, as he usually is. Harry Shearer is nowhere to be seen, though. If you're a fan of Guest's work, see Best in Show. You may not love it, like me, but it still be good for a few chuckles.
The Big Lebowski: 6/10One of the first of its breed: the Coen brothers comedies. All of my ratings for those have been almost the same. Each movie has a handful of small laughs, until the movie makes a complete turn and has one over-the-top, culminating, hilarious moment. Here, it wasn't the ashes, which isn't what most would assume, but the ear. The plot of this movie is about a slacker, The Dude (Jeff Bridges), whose rug is befouled by thugs looking for someone else with the same name. The Dude goes on to get his rug back, or some money, along with John Goodman and Steve Buscemi. It's an interesting enough neo-noir, but like other Coen brothers movies, characters walk in and out (Julianne Moore, anyone?) with no development, and it seems to go on for maybe 15 minutes too much. A few inspired sequences lined the way, along with some funny conversations and Steve Buscemi (he don't get no respect), pepper the movie when it drags. I don't see how people could really worship this movie religiously, but it's certainly not bad.
Classic Hitchcock thriller about a group of birds that terrorize a costal California town. There are a few classic scenes, and those are quite hair-raising. However, Hitchcock takes a "what you don't see scares you" route for most of the movie, except it was just to build up the movie, not the suspense. It's very slow until about the 1:30 mark. In addition, the backlighting is the worst I've ever seen. Once it finds where it wants to be, in the "birds attacking" more, then The Birds is an effective movie. However, for most of it, it's just a slow-moving drama that isn't really interesting.
1950s B-movie about a giant blob from outer space that eats people! Steve McQueen has his first starring role as a 25-going-on-17 year old. The acting is bad, the transfer is bad, but you can't help liking it. It's pretty funny in some parts, and the music is good, but there's no terror (as there isn't in all B-movies), and the characters are more clueless than, well, clueless people usually are. I saw this movie in the theater where everyone ran out, and each year they have an annual "Blob-fest", making this feature more enjoyable.
Western-comedy-character study of famous outlaws Butch and Sundance as they're chased through the US, and then they flee to Bolivia. There's great chemistry and acting here, Paul Newman and Robert Redford, as the two stars, bounce off each other and repeat quick lines. It's very realistic (Butch has to reload!), and gives us depth of not only Butch and Sundance, but also love interest Etta Place (Katharine Ross). Great scenes include when Sundance shoots the gun in the beginning (look for a young Sam Elliott), when Butch and Etta go horseback riding under the sunny sky to "Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head", and the ending scene.
I know nothing about the German Expressionist film period, but from what I've heard, this movie is a perfect example of the period. Two friends go to a fair, where the mysterious Dr. Caligari has a sideshow attraction, Cesare, who answers any question asked by a participant. So when one of the friends asks how much longer he'll live, Cesare says "Until the dawn." Sure enough, he winds up dead, and his friend goes to solve the mystery. Very bizarre (considering it was made in 1920), with tinted vision, and it's silent. I saw it with a live music accompaniment. The movie has an odd look to it-there are barely any, if any, right angles. The titlecards with the spoken dialogue were weird, also. It's also surprisingly technologically advanced for 85 years ago. The superposed text looked almost modern, the camera never moved, and I'm not sure whether it was style or bad editing that caused the common choppiness. A very weird movie all in all, but I would have liked a more fulfilling ending.
Interesting, engaging documentary about a middle class Jewish family gone into turmoil when the father and youngest son are accused of sexually abusing many young kids. This tears the family apart. It's very two-sided, with lots of the information almost contradicting each other, and many different talking heads with their two cents throwing information. However, first-time director Andrew Jarecki (co-creator of MovieFone) tries too hard to keep this objective, and it becomes irritating after awhile. It would have been a little better if he had leaned towards one side at times. Still, it opened my eyes to a decaying family and how just an accusation can tear a family apart.
A Christmas Story: 7/10Amiable comedy about a kid (Peter Billingsley) in the 1930's who just wants a BB gun for Christmas. It's really less a Christmas movie than a throwback to childhood. Everyone remembers wanting that ONE Christmas gift, having their mouth washed out with soap, etc. The narration is perfect, it adds humor and gives us insight into young Ralphie's mind. However, as much as everyone loves this movie, I just didn't find it that funny. Sure, some of the situations were humorous, but rarely did I laugh out loud. I think what really made it odd for me was how close it hit to home but eventually went over-the-top. Of course, I think that's what was being gone for: so unrealistic it reminded us of our childhood, but it was just an odd combonation. Overall, though, it is quite a good movie in its own right.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again. I hate reviewing classic movies, not only because I can't dislike them, but there's really not much I can say about them that hasn't already been said. But it is a great movie. Everyone knows what Rosebud is now, but the movie draws you into the investigation behind Charles Foster Kane, the fictionalized version of William Randolph Hearst: his life to his death, when he utters the single word "Rosebud". The movie, sparked with great dialogue and images, really would be amazing to see in its initial release year (1941). It created new standards in movie-making, technically. The cinematography would have been amazing, and is still great to look at. No matter what people say, Citizen Kane is not a boring film. It's gripping in an odd way, making this movie one that everyone should see.
Likeable French comedy about a milquetoast working man who is about to lose his job. To keep it, he pretends to be gay so he won't be fired due to discrimination. I saw it first in theaters and gave it 9/10, and now on DVD it would be 7/10 (hence the 8/10 average). Although it still keeps its quirky charm and irreverantness, almost every joke stays in your head for a long time (like many Christopher Guest movies), so when you see it repeated, it isn't as funny. Although much of it is wacky (like the condom hat), it has a cool sense of style to it, which makes it admirable.
After his show Seinfeld was cancelled when I was in the third grade, Jerry Seinfeld has been trying to earn some dough. He goes back to his roots in stand-up comedy in this involving documentary that needs to show more change. Seinfeld basically receives laughs because he IS Seinfeld. Also, we follow the career of ultra-cocky comic Orny Adams, who thinks he can make it big. I wasn't interested in his career. Overall, it's a good documentary, but doesn't really go deep enough into the life of Seinfeld.
Contempt: 9/10I'm finally expanding to as many directors as possible, although not beginning at all of their most famous movies (see also Fellini and Amarcord), I realize why these directors are famous. I've learned about Godard's style and everything, and it's evident in Contempt. It's basically a big cinema in-joke, but it's not really funny. But it is a fascinating two part story. The first involves screenwriter Paul (Michel Piccoli) trying to defend his version of a film to American producer Jeremy Prokosch (Jack Palance), which is to be directed by Fritz Lang, playing himself. The second part is Paul's struggle with his wife, Camille (Bridgette Bardot). This film, like most of the French New Wavers' films, are semi-autobiographical. This one deals with Godard's attempts to make this film and his struggle with American producers. He taints some of the film red, white, and blue, and usually includes most of them in the shots. This film, which is Godard's only without starring his wife Anna Karina (which is also a basis for the second plot), seems to be slow moving for the whole thing, but the dialogue's very interesting and you soon realize that you find this person's life very interesting and exciting. The troubles, that the film makes seem normal, are quite different from those of you and I. I think it's that aspect, that Godard makes these insanely rich people seem normal (and not in a demeaning light), that makes Contempt such an interesting film (especially when you go back to look at it).
Croupier: 8/10A lot of movies should be seen, but aren't. This is one of them. Croupier is about a struggling writer who takes up a job at an odd casino as a croupier, but then (of course) gets in over his head. It's a very subtle movie. None of the dialogue is unnecessary, music is rarely used, and it's one of the smartest movies I've seen in a while. It even had somewhat of a Fight Club feel to it, although this movie came out first. Not only is this movie entertaining, it brings a grittier look to the casino world. Highly recommended.
Dog Day Afternoon: 7/10One of those "classics-that-you-see-just-so-you-can-say-you-saw-it", it's a very inspired retelling of a real-life story of a man (Al Pacino) who holds up a bank in Brooklyn in order to get money to pay for his lover's (Chris Sarandon) sex-change operation. While he expects it to be a quick job, complications arise, and media ensues. All of the sudden fame gets to his head. It's a very daring picture, since it's not a light topic, and the way that Sidney Lumet directs it is very odd. Besides the five-minute opening montage, there is no music in the film at all. It makes it seem longer than it's already over-long two hours. Although it is very tense, at times it dragged a lot, especially in the middle. Some of the plot repeated itself, and became dull. Sonny needs to go outside, something bad happens to a hostage, etc. Pacino is great, however, as is most of the rest of the picture.
Double Indemnity: 8/10A (or rather, the) classic film-noir about Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray), insurance salesman who becomes involved with a murder plot with Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck), and with Phyllis herself. The movie has sharp, snappy dialogue from director Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler, which pushes the movie along whenever it's in danger of becoming too slow. Its characters are well thought out, the pacing's good, and the movie's entertaining. I wouldn't go so far as to call it gripping, but you latch onto it for its perfect runtime and stay involved throughout. The mystery is there, and although the first turning point doesn't really come until halfway through, it still leaves you wondering what will happen to Walter. A great ending, too. All in all, a solid film-noir.
Escape from Alcatraz: 7/10Slow but enjoyable dramaticized real-life story of a breakout from Alcatraz prison. Clint Eastwood stars as the ringleader of the expidition. The movie itself is not really centered completely about the breakout, but also about life in Alcatraz. I've taken the tour of it in San Francisco, but I could never fully grasp what life was like. The movie moves slowly, but was never boring, allowing attachment to some undeveloped characters. The breakout itself was exciting, as was just the planning. A good movie overall.
One of the "real" political thrillers of its day, I watched it in pieces in social studies class and was one of the only pupils who liked it. The U.S. mistakenly sent out bombers to attack Russia, but when they find out that it was accidenal, they try to get everyone back. It's very thrilling, except I think I missed some parts, and I didn't really know who all of the characters were. However, the ending was so jaw-dropping and stunning I was blown back. I gasped not only because it's not what Dubya would do, but it was so out-of-the-blue.
Being a big fan of both Bill and Ted movies, I had to see this movie, written and directed by Alex "Bill" Winter. A man (Henry Thomas), a struggling artist, has a fever, and a murder happens in his apartment complex. Could he have done it? An oveused premise, with basic dialogue and a normal style. It's obvious where it's going, and leaves nothing to the imagination. Some of the images are neat, however, and generally creepy, like the old lady around the swirling room. It's not a great movie, however, and it seems to go on for too long, even though it's only 90 minutes.
Lightweight comedy about six unemployed steel workers who decide, for money, to become male strippers and get in over their head. Some very funny moments indeed, mostly involving garden gnomes, but there are quite a lot of dead spots. In addition, some of the sentiment seemed to get too heavy. It did, however, show that Mark Addy can be a good actor. It's an original premise, and one that if done in the United States would be so crude you couldn't even to begin to say how crude it would be. In fact, most of the humor doesn't even come from the stripping. Overall, if you enjoy amaiable comedies with some great moments, this is a good choice.
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum: 6/10Those crazy Romans. First they rule the world, then they fall, then a musical is based upon them. Zero Mostel is Psuedolus, a slave in ancient Rome, who tries to get his way to freedom by marrying his master's son and a virgin prostitute. Zany things happen. It's obvious that this is obviously cut from the original stage version, as there are only probably a third-dozen songs in it. The vocals aren't very good at all, and the songs don't really work that well. However, they're not bad. Mostel is great, as he always is, and the movie has a few laughs in it, including Buster Keaton in his last role. The final climactic "chase" scene (if you can call it that?) is entertaining, although impossible to keep track of, and probably worked better on stage. But for its short runtime, it's entertaining enough, and worth a watch.
Gigantic: A Tale of Two Johns: 8/10If you're as big a nerd as I, you're obviously obsessed with the cult band They Might be Giants. Ever since seeing two animated music videos of theirs (don't ask), I've been a big fan, and although this cheerful documentary wasn't really released wide released, a solid DVD release is good for it. Those who don't really know much or care much about TMBG won't find much useful here, but for those interested in the group, there's some background as well as their way up to the top. Also, famous comedians recite some lyrics in a melodramatic tone. What more could you want? This documentary isn't meant to be taken very seriously, and it's not on a serious topic, but it's fun to watch and informative on the band. A welcome release from all of the heavy handed docs we've been getting recently.
Glory: 7/10Watching this in history class, it was in pieces (and edited, and in pan-and-scan), but I think I got most of the movie. Col. Robert Shaw (Matthew Broderick with an American-trying-to-do-a-British-accent-trying-to-do-an-American-accent) is chosen to lead the first (according the movie) all-black regiment in the Civil War. Along for the ride are Denzel "Best Supporting Actor For a Mediocre Role" Washington, Morgan Freeman, and Cary "What The Hell Happened To Me?" Elwes. The movie's entertaining and informative (although not historically correct). The voice-over seems to fit in well, but in terms of excitement during the battle scenes (the perfect length, I might add), I didn't see any. Any scene with the soldiers just lying around and talking didn't grab my interest, either. Broderick's moustache distracted me, and I think the secondary characters had absolutely no development. Perhaps I'll try this again at a later date (the REAL version), but overall, I liked Glory, but it's not spectacular.
The problem with classic movies is that I pretty much HAVE to like them or be disregarded as anyone serious. And, as in the case of most classic movies I see, I like them a lot, but I don't love them, as is the case in GoodFellas. Although it is a very intersting look at what actually happens in the mafia world, it's very long, longer than it needs to be. Some subplots could have been taken out, and what really marred it for me was how much I didn't like the main character, Henry Hill. Movies are supposed to have likeable characters, to help us root for them, but the only character I even remotely liked was Joe Pesci's Tommy (who shouldn't have even been nominated for Best Supporting Actor). GoodFellas could have benifitted with tighter editing, so the supremely interesting story could have been done better, but it's still a very involved look at mob life.
Treat Williams hasn't had a lustrious career, but what he began from was Hair, an obligatory movie of a musical. A two part film, with the first part having more enjoyable dance numbers and songs. Although they all sounded the same, and some just a few lines long, many were entertaining. However, where the songs went right the plot went wrong. There's not much of one, and what's there is weak. You can't really make an entire movie around hippies. If you do want to rent Hair, see it mainly for the uber-cool DVD menu.
Lawrence of Arabia: 8/10An epic if there ever was an epic, David Lean's almost-four-hour movie flies by quickly because of an interesting story and a beautiful picture to look at. T.E. Lawrence,, a British lieutenant, plays both sides-somewhat like Yojimbo-of an Arab revolt against the Turks. It's a little confusing at times, always interesting, sometimes exciting. It's fun to watch, and Peter O'Toole does a great job for his first starring role. The scope picture is great to look at, especially on the big screen. It's the picture that makes Lawrence of Arabia as good as it is. After the intermission, things drag a little, but it's a great movie nonetheless. It holds up extremely well after 42 years.
Living in Oblivion: 10/10Spectacular and distressingly true-to-life three-part telling of the struggles of making independent films. Steve Buscemi stars as the director of all three films, where everything wrong thing imaginable happens. Catherine Keener, Dermot Mulroney and Peter Dinklage also star. To find everything in this film funny, you need to have a working knowledge of the film process. A boom mike falling into frame during a shoot could be humorous to most people, but since I had just worked for four weeks on a film, it was uproarious. It's nice to see that this happens to other people also, and even though Buscemi's character is overworked and everything, we can feel better about what we went through. Not to mention that most of the dialogue is very funny and that the movie's surprisingly poignant and has a feel-good quality to it. It's an amazing film, and I think it would have excellent re-watch value.
In the 23rd century, people will live in isolation and complete paradise until their 30th birthday, when they are killed. One man, Logan, wonders what lies beyond, and journeys out. There are three parts to this film. The first is a typical science fiction, one that's quite intersting that I would have liked to seen more of. The second part is thankfully the shortest, with a fake ice cave and a B-movie robot named Box. Yes, it's as absurb and unnecessary as it sounds. Then the last part is almost like The Twilight Zone. If it was more even, then maybe I could have liked this movie more, but it's just another mediocre "classic" sci-fi movie.
M: 7/10M is Peter Lorre's first real role, and it's a shocker. He plays child murderer Hans Beckert, who roams the German streets. The police and media frenzy do no good, so criminals themselves get in on the "fun". It takes its sweet time getting started, but it picks up about halfway through to a truly horrifying conclusion with a great acting performance by Lorre. His whistling of the "Hall of the Mountain King" is even scary, which makes a haunting atmosphere. However, the first hour or so is quite dull, and the German's harsh on the ears. But as long as you can survive the beginning, you'll be able to appreciate the movie in general at the end, as well as the rest of the movie.
A classic thriller, being (of course) remade, The Manchurian Candidate has all of the right ingrediants for a thriller, and they're used to perfection. Made during the paranoia of the Cold War, it's still effective today. A group of soldiers, coming back from the war, are brainwashed into becoming killers for the Soviet Union. This movie is very thrilling and exciting. It's done effectively and in a complex way-but it still works. Angela Lansbury is amazing as the wife of a senator willing to do anything to further his, and her, career. Overall, a deep, entertaining movie.
Maybe I have something against French comedy-dramas (hence my review for Amelie, less than everyone else), but this one didn't work for me. Two men are supposed to have met on a train (which I didn't see, either it wasn't in the movie or because I walked in about 2 minutes late) and be fascinated by each other's jobs, one a retired teacher and one a bank robber. They then are supposed to change jobs, according to everything I heard before. Instead of an interesting premise, they just "become friends", althought the bank robber doesn't seem to be enjoying himself. They don't even change jobs, and what ensues is an hour and a half of a creaky drama, with the teacher way too enthusastic. There are better art house movies to waste your money on.
This classic thriller starts off slow...very, very slow. Much like the book (written by William Goldman, which he also adapted), the first half or so is very slow, establishing character and unnecessary subplots. However, one dramatic event turns it from slow drama to fast-paced thriller. While the book did a complete 180, the movie version took its time more and didn't have the impact. The famous torture scene (involving Laurence Olivier, Dustin Hoffman, and an assortment of dental devices), which was quite explicit in the book, is very short. It's the most important scene, and yet there's no impact. However, the second half is quite thrilling (and has another odd scene, which rivals the torture one), and the movie's greatest asset is the acting by Hoffman, and Olivier. I would reccommend the book more than the movie, however, the movie isn't half bad.
The weirdest non-Lynch move I have ever seen. In it, Angela Bettis plays May, a lonely, anti-social young woman whose only friend is a doll that her mother gave her as a child. However, she meets Adam (Jeremy Sisto), who "likes weird", and start a relationship. That, and other odd things lead up the phenomenal last thirty minutes, where the movie knows what it's going to be. For the first hour, it's an uneven mix of psycho-drama, comedy, and horror (all three fail), while the last half hour is pure fun (I'll just dub that last half hour "The Murders"). Bettis is a great actress, and she should go far. Although gruesome at time, if you see May, you won't be disappointed in the last half hour.
There's a reason why Rodney Dangerfield doesn't get any respect. He does roles like Wally Sparks, a trash TV host whose show is going under, so he broadcasts from a governor's mansion and finds a sex scandal there. Almost all of the humor is the one liners that come out of Wally's mouth, and sometimes they're funny, and sometimes they aren't. However, a few gags are thrown in that are usually funny, like the statue and the video. Oftentimes, though, they just rely on madcap humor, such as Wally riding through a party on a drunken horse. Whenever something like that happens, you just want the scene to finish so Wally can say something funny soon.
The only film rated X to win Best Picture, Midnight Cowboy stars Jon Voight as naive male prostitute Joe Buck who moves to New York and befriends shifty Ratso Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman). Supremely acted, it has poignancy and delievers sadness. Although it has much profanity, it was changed two year later to an R rating. The ending, albeit predictable, really is memorable and heart-wrenching, although I do wish that a little more had been told at the end.
In 1981, Mommie Dearest sweeped the first Golden Raspberry awards for bad films. Also, in 1990, it won the Razzie for "worst film of the 1980s". While it isn't perfect, Mommie Dearest, although it should've won one for Worst Title, has its disturbing moments into the life of Joan Crawford. The movie star was famous for her generousity, but she had inner demons, as explored through the film. She adpots two children, but, as it looks, she's a perfectionist. She is upset whenever something isn't perfect, and takes it out on her children. It's hard to tell wheteher she just was a perfectionist, obsessive-compulsive, or her elevator didn't go all the way to the top. Still, it's not a bad film, but not a terribly good one.
The Mouse That Roared: 6/10Peter Sellers' first starring trifecta (beating out Dr. Strangelove by a full 5 years) is an inept army commander, prime minister, and queen of the smallest country in the world-Grand Fenwick. The country's in debt, so they go to war with the USA and try to lose immediately so that they get money in war aid. The only problem is, losing's not that easy for them. It's not that funny (one of those movies where the concept's funnier than the actual movie), but it's a very clever idea, and executed well. It's short and entertaining, and even spawned a sequel. A good movie to pop in if you're bored one night, but it's nothing earth-shattering.
In short, Network is an amazing movie. Being a sucker for the media for too long, this movie (along with The Corporation, shown at this year’s Philadelphia Film Festival) changed my mind about the media, mass corporation, and everything in between. The desperate measures taken by this fiction television station are just so exploitative and deceitful that they’re probably true. The mistreatment of Howard Beale just shocked me, which is what the movie wanted me to feel. The acting was all superb, especially by Peter Finch (Beale), but I think the most impressive part of the whole movie was the script by Paddy Chayefsky. Not only did it ring a lot of truth, but all of the actors carried it out so well. Overall, I only had two complaints about the film. The first was the lack of music, which made this two-hour film seem even longer. Second is the billing of this movie as a comedy. I did not even laugh once. However, those two points are moot compared to the complete impact the rest of the movie had upon me.
Pointless anthology film about New York that aren't connected to each other in any way. It would be even worse if none of the segments were directed by anyone famous. Martin Scorcese's "Life Lessons" is overly dramatic and doesn't go deep enough as he seems to think, but could have been good. Francis Ford Coppola's horrible "Life without Zoe" has no redeeming qualities, nothing good at all. It doesn't even make any sense, nor is it interesting. The last one, Woody Allen's "Oedipus Wrecks" is funny and imagenitive, the only good one out of the three. If it's ever on TV, watch the last 40 minutes for Allen's sketch, because the other two aren't worth your time.
Silly Bond spoof with James Coburn of uber-suave Derek Flint, hired to save the world from evil people who control the weather. Since it was made forty years ago, it obviously can't have the randiness of the Austin Powers movies, but it still has some humor, mainly one linerse or obvious jokes on the spy films. Coburn's pretty cool as Flint, who's even cooler than Bond is himself, but there's basically no plot, and not that much humor. Still, its entertaining to see its cheesiness.
Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism: 8/10The documentary we've all been waiting for: an exposé on Fox News and whether they're really "fair and balanced". Of course, this isn't anything new; most people who don't live under rocks know that Fox falls to the right. But in this documentary Robert Greenwald investigates the truth behind the "fair and balanced" claim, how Fox puts in somewhat subliminal images, and making the pundit that is Bill O'Reilly looking like a complete fool. Much of this footage is pretty funny, considering how absurd Fox News is, and may enlighten you a little, but the kicker is having a bunch of former Fox News employees (and some current ones, remaining nameless) saying about how unfair and unbalanced the whole station is, and how it's just a vessel for the GOP. However, the movie comes off as a little amatuerish (some of the titles look like they were done by a 13 year old, but the rest of the movie comes off as an accurate portrayal of what Fox News actually is-no doctored footage here, as Fox's own words are used against them.
Papillon: 9/10Intensely entertaining and enthralling Steve McQueen pic about a man who constantly breaks out of wherever he is. Although it's a little long, it's never boring and it keeps your attention. The movie starts off slowly, but soon becomes more exciting as it goes on. Although not much backstory on the main character is presented, the movie showed the harrowing conditions he was put through, and it all seemed realistic, not sensationalized. Dustin Hoffman, as Papillon's partner, did a good job of basically being a nebbish, and added to the movie as a whole, which already is strong.
Average broad comedy which plays like a PG-13 version of Animal House in which slapstick occurances happen to college kids. Jeremy Piven plays the Bluto-ish role, to less effect, and everything seems downplayed. It's surprisingly funny for such a generic screwball comedy, with some good scenes and lines, but it's just mediocre in its basicness. Nothing overwhelming, just a basic madcap comedy, nothing gained, nothing lost.
Planes, Trains, and Automobiles: 9/10The classic holiday road trip from hell, with John Candy and Steve Martin. Martin is overworked advertising exec Neal Page, trying to get home to Chicago for Thanksgiving. Through various series of mishaps, he has to take the title modes of transportation, and always ends up with obnoxious Del Griffith (Candy). The movie is hilarious, plain and simple, but there's more to the movie than that. Candy plays a character who appears to be annoying, but really isn't, and being a character that (God forbid) we would be able to meet somehow in real life. And Martin plays a perfect antithesis to Candy, making them the true odd couple. The most surprising moment is how it gets to sentiment so early in the movie. And it goes seamlessly from that into the famous "pillow" scene. The only parts that could have been improved is the music (must we be reminded whenever something bad happens?) and the length. It seemed like a scene or two was missing. Other than that, it's an amazing movie: funny, touching, and wildly entertaining.
Platoon: 9/10Harrowing, extremely realistic Vietnam War movie based on writer/director Oliver Stone's personal experience. Charlie Sheen stars, with Willem Dafoe and Tom Berenger in supporting roles. This movie has the right balance between the psychological effects on the soldiers and the actual fighting scenes, something most war movies now need to get. And not only that, but you actually care about most of the characters. Hollywood studios are done up to look exactly like Cambodia to add to the realism of the movie. It shows the true trauma that came out of the war, much like The Deer Hunter, but done differently. It stretches on a little too long, but other than that it's a supreme movie.
Porky's: 5/10The reason such teen comedies as American Pie exist today. The loose plot and broadly drawn characters are used as a basis of teen movies today. In this movie, a bunch of teenagers in the 1950s get revenge on a strip club that humiliated them. There's not many laughs throughout, but it's a lot more risque and inappropriate than love with a pie. It's almost shocking on how far they pushed the limit, but they did. For the most part, it's more entertaining than funny, with a few good parts here and there, but nothing major until one scene that involves a gym teacher and a hole in the shower wall. One of the funniest scenes ever. But then it descends into random mayhem. Overall, Porky's is a classic not because it makes you laugh consistently throughout, but it led the way for other teen movies years later.
Rashomon: 4/10Not a film you can just pop in and enjoy. It's based around a few different viewpoints of a recent crime. Each story is different, but why? I don't see any reason. Nothing's really resolved, there's not much plot, and it all leads up to nothing, really. Maybe it's because I was tired when I saw it, or that the screen resolution was awful (the black and white seemed almost blurred together), but I didn't find much to it besides something interesting with which they could have gone farther. The film dragged for its short runtime, and overall didn't impress me at all. I'll try it again sometime, but I was much more impressed with Kurosawa's Yojimbo.
Way, way, way overlong (three hours) adaptation of the classic Stephen King novel about vampires. Although King can usually create something different based on all of the myths, in both the book and the movie all of the stereotypes of vampires were there. Why not have something different besides driving a stake through a vampire's heart? I would think that King could do better. David "Hutch" Soul stars as the one-dimensional "hero", with James Mason putting in as good as a job he could with this weak movie as an evil antique dealer. One or two tense scenes (the one I was looking forward to the most, the only good scene from the book, was displayed badly, with the vampire outside of the window) does not a good movie make.
Saturday Night Fever: 8/10This is the movie that made John Travolta really famous. He plays Tony Manero, whose main goal in life is going to the disco. The movie revolves not only around that, but around his family and personal life. I expected there to be some sort of very thin plot to hold it all together, but everything tied together well. The music is amazing, as are all of the dancing scenes. The music's infectious because, well, it's disco music. It's understandable why this movie shot Travolta up in Hollywood-he's great, and can really dance. It's a very entertaining movie, and holds up well 27 years later.
The Story of the Weeping Camel: 6/10The best part of this movie is seeing how different Mongolian culture is from ours. A family of nomads, who depend on camels for their lives, have just had a successful season of birth for camels, except for one, which comes out in a painful delivery. The mother doesn't accept the calf, and they have to find some way to reunite the two. The movie itself is not really an event worth filming-although events like that aren't common, I'm sure they aren't completely rare. The picture, which should have been shot in scope, is nice to look at, and the picture is never really boring, but the story's not even long enough for a 90 minute documentary-there's a whole tangent of the trek out to get the musician to help the camels. It's interesting to see the culture of the Mongolians, but the picture is nothing to write home about.
Welcome to Collinwood: 2/10You know what makes a comedy a comedy? Humor. By that standard, Welcome to Collinwood is about the furthest from a comedy any movie can be. There's so many bungled heist movies out there, there really needs to be something original and outstanding about each one. Collinwood's is that there are a few made up words that are supposed to be A Clockwork Orange-like, but instead, they're just used randomly and unnecessarialy. There's a slough of "interesting" characters, such as the guy with the bad temper (Luis Guzman), the single father who (ironically, the film would want you to think) commits crimes (William H. Macy), a paraplegic safecracked (George Clooney), and others. None of these characters add up to any laughs at all. There's some mindless destruction, naked old people, and the ultra-annoying habit of playing some of the end of the film in the beginning (about 10 seconds here). Plus, the plot's hard to follow, nothing makes sense, and it's the longest 86 minutes I've probably ever had to sit through.
Joan Crawford and Bette Davis are in top form in this classic thriller. Davis is Baby Jane, a former child star a la Shirley Temple who is mad now that her sister Blanche is a "real" actress. Wheelchair bound, Blanche is tortured by Jane, and there's nothing she can do about it. It has the claustrophobic feel of movies like Misery, and has grade-A suspense throughout. Would warrant a higher rating if the popular ending wasn't there, it didn't do anything for me.
This was my first excursion into classic Japanese cinema. It's based on a Dashiell Hammett book, and was remade twice (once as A Fistful of Dollars). The story has a man with no name (Toshiro Mifune), a former Samurai, who comes to a town ruled by two gangs. He pits them against each other for his own gain and to save the town. The first half of the movie is amazing: the visionary styles of Akira Kurosawa were amazing, the plot was inolving and exciting, the movie in itself was almost lyrical. Then when the second part came around, everything just stopped. The excitement and inivolvment of the first part died. It wasn't interesting at all. My interest was lost. Thankfully, it had a great ending scene to make up for it.