Episode Ratings:
Excellent: Go Fund Yourself, Grounded Vindaloop
Good: Cock Magic, #Rehash, Happy Halograms.
Average: Gluten Free Ebola, The Cissy, The Magic Bush
Bad: Handicare
This was a very mixed season of South Park. There were a few clever episodes that made me laugh, but too much of it was either filler or an attempt to cash in on current events. Further, South Park instead of resolves shows by using surrealism/fantasy as an easy way out. For example, "Freemium Isn't Free" starts off as a humorous satire of "Free" online games but then turns into an absurd fight between Satan and a Canadian Devil to end the episode. And even their funniest shows, such as Mystery of the Urinal Deuce are often marred by dumb poop jokes, crassness, attacks on Christianity and surrealism (in a bad way). South Park is often thought as Anti-PC, but most episodes never stray too far from standard Hollywood liberalism. Season 18 is no exception. Football owner Dan Snyder is attacked for using the Redskins team name, while the underlying message of Season 18 is the need to accept Transgendered individuals.
Sunday, February 26, 2017
The Next Voice you Hear (1950)
Plot: We follow one average American family when - for one week -the voice of God is heard on radios all over the world.
Stars: Nancy Davis, James Whitmore.
Some consider this a minor cult classic. The movie has an interesting premise. What would happen if God made himself known to us, in the same way he did to the Old testament prophets or St. Paul? The movie follows the effect of God speaking to the world through the eyes of an average American (Joe Smith), who's angry, frustrated and sometimes hopeless (like Its a Wonderful Life's George Bailey). But when Joe listens to God on the radio he becomes a better man. Unfortunately, the movie's message isn't executed very well. First, I've never liked Nancy Davis (Reagan) she always came off as artificial and brittle - onscreen and off. Nor did I like Whitmore, or his character - who's frankly unlikable through much of the movie. Finally, the script/writing never rises above the mediocre. I wish I could have loved the movie - but I didn't. Summary: A mediocre movie with an extremely interesting premise. **1/2
Stars: Nancy Davis, James Whitmore.
Some consider this a minor cult classic. The movie has an interesting premise. What would happen if God made himself known to us, in the same way he did to the Old testament prophets or St. Paul? The movie follows the effect of God speaking to the world through the eyes of an average American (Joe Smith), who's angry, frustrated and sometimes hopeless (like Its a Wonderful Life's George Bailey). But when Joe listens to God on the radio he becomes a better man. Unfortunately, the movie's message isn't executed very well. First, I've never liked Nancy Davis (Reagan) she always came off as artificial and brittle - onscreen and off. Nor did I like Whitmore, or his character - who's frankly unlikable through much of the movie. Finally, the script/writing never rises above the mediocre. I wish I could have loved the movie - but I didn't. Summary: A mediocre movie with an extremely interesting premise. **1/2
Monday, February 20, 2017
Hour of the Gun (1967)
Plot: After the Clanton's kill his brother, Wyatt Earp and his friend Doc Holliday chase the killers.
Director: John Sturges
Stars: James Garner, Jason Robards, Robert Ryan.
Hour of the Gun is another in a long series of movies about the Clantons, Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday. I've never understood everyone's fascination with the story but John Sturges' shares it, since this is his second movie on the subject, the first being the 1955 Gunfight at the OK Corral. This one starts with the famous Gunfight at the OK Corral (the usual ending) and then follows Earp (Garner) and Holliday (Robards) as they try to bring Ike Clayton (Ryan) to justice.
The whole thing is workmanlike but forgettable. It tries to stick more closely to the facts (the movie starts with the words "This is how it really happened") and tries to be grim and "realistic" but that doesn't it make it more interesting or exciting. Acting-wise Garner is way too repressed and stoic, while Robards overacts shamelessly. Ryan plays his usual standard villain. Like Gunfight at the OK Corral we get a cycle of talk-talk followed by violence, then rinse and repeat. Probably the best thing is the beautiful Mexican location shots by Lucien Ballard.
Summary: Its not that good, its not that bad. If you like Wyatt Earp-Doc Holliday Westerns you should give this one a try.
Director: John Sturges
Stars: James Garner, Jason Robards, Robert Ryan.
Hour of the Gun is another in a long series of movies about the Clantons, Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday. I've never understood everyone's fascination with the story but John Sturges' shares it, since this is his second movie on the subject, the first being the 1955 Gunfight at the OK Corral. This one starts with the famous Gunfight at the OK Corral (the usual ending) and then follows Earp (Garner) and Holliday (Robards) as they try to bring Ike Clayton (Ryan) to justice.
The whole thing is workmanlike but forgettable. It tries to stick more closely to the facts (the movie starts with the words "This is how it really happened") and tries to be grim and "realistic" but that doesn't it make it more interesting or exciting. Acting-wise Garner is way too repressed and stoic, while Robards overacts shamelessly. Ryan plays his usual standard villain. Like Gunfight at the OK Corral we get a cycle of talk-talk followed by violence, then rinse and repeat. Probably the best thing is the beautiful Mexican location shots by Lucien Ballard.
Summary: Its not that good, its not that bad. If you like Wyatt Earp-Doc Holliday Westerns you should give this one a try.
Grand Prix (1966)
Stars: James Garner, Eva Marie Saint, Yves Montand
Overly long racing movie that zooms along when on the track, but slows to a crawl when off. The acting is good enough, but the script/story can't justify a 3 hour run time. In 1966 the movie was very popular, no doubt due to the novel excitement of seeing Grand Prix on the big screen, but 50 years later its much less so. Garner is good as the main character, although Steve McQueen was supposedly the first choice for the role and and would've brought more authenticity and Pizzazz to the role. Garner is too nice of guy to play a ruthless bastard. Eva Marie Saint does what she can with a standard soap opera role.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
All is Lost (2013)
Plot - After a collision with a shipping container at sea, a resourceful sailor finds himself, despite all efforts to the contrary, staring his mortality in the face.
Robert Redford is excellent is this survival at sea tale. Almost a silent movie, and its just Redford, the Boat, and the Ocean. The film is to be commended for just focusing on the action. No unnecessary flashbacks, no talking to camera, no cutaways to anxious family members. Its just us following Redford as he tries to survive. It all seems believable too, although I wonder how an experienced sailor would have a radio that's allergic to salt water or how a container could ram into his boat without awakening him. But those are minor quibbles. The camera work is also good, with no obvious CGI shots, and some excellent real life ones.
Summary: I enjoyed it a lot. ***1/2
Robert Redford is excellent is this survival at sea tale. Almost a silent movie, and its just Redford, the Boat, and the Ocean. The film is to be commended for just focusing on the action. No unnecessary flashbacks, no talking to camera, no cutaways to anxious family members. Its just us following Redford as he tries to survive. It all seems believable too, although I wonder how an experienced sailor would have a radio that's allergic to salt water or how a container could ram into his boat without awakening him. But those are minor quibbles. The camera work is also good, with no obvious CGI shots, and some excellent real life ones.
Summary: I enjoyed it a lot. ***1/2
12 Monkeys - The Racket - Timetable
Twelve Monkeys (1995)- Bruce Willis stars in this Terry Gilliam remake of La Jetee. Plot: A convict goes back in time to investigate a man-made virus that wiped out Billions of people. Highly rated (IMDB rank 235) this movie has a great futuristic look and an interesting plot. Willis does well in the leading role, while Pitt overacts to an annoying degree. It a way it’s a great movie and it kept me involved, but the movie has a brain but no heart. Like Brazil and Memento its all just an exercise in cleverness and atmospherics. The characters are unlikable and it says nothing interesting about the human condition. Everyone should see it at least once, but I have no desire to re-visit it.
The Racket (1928) – Silent film based on a popular play. Plot: An honest police captain vows to bring down a powerful bootlegger who is protected by corrupt politicians and judges. This was pretty good. An entertaining gangster film with well cast leads. Unfortunately, the plot and various gangster scenes have been copied so often in the last 90 years, it all seems like old hat. The acting is good and realistic, especially Louis Wolheim as the ruthless gangster who dislikes the Law and women (shades of Rico). Note: the Leading Lady and 2 male leads met sad ends. Two of three died of cancer in the 1930s while Marie Prevost drank herself to death.
Timetable (1956)- Nice little crime movie about an Investigator (Mark Stevens) trailing a man who stole a $500,000 payroll from a baggage-car. Its a "B" movie but full of plot twists and intriguing characters, and features a supporting cast of familiar faces (Alan Reed, Jack Klugman, etc).
The Racket (1928) – Silent film based on a popular play. Plot: An honest police captain vows to bring down a powerful bootlegger who is protected by corrupt politicians and judges. This was pretty good. An entertaining gangster film with well cast leads. Unfortunately, the plot and various gangster scenes have been copied so often in the last 90 years, it all seems like old hat. The acting is good and realistic, especially Louis Wolheim as the ruthless gangster who dislikes the Law and women (shades of Rico). Note: the Leading Lady and 2 male leads met sad ends. Two of three died of cancer in the 1930s while Marie Prevost drank herself to death.
Timetable (1956)- Nice little crime movie about an Investigator (Mark Stevens) trailing a man who stole a $500,000 payroll from a baggage-car. Its a "B" movie but full of plot twists and intriguing characters, and features a supporting cast of familiar faces (Alan Reed, Jack Klugman, etc).
Mad Men - Season 7
Mad Men Season 7 - I started out as big fan of Mad Men but it became clear after Season 3 that Weiner had shot his bolt. The characters and their story arc, as originally conceived were pretty much complete when Betty divorced Don and all the former 'Frenemies' decided they were really all great chums and went to reform Sterling, Price, and Cooper. Seasons 4-6 were more or less a delightful Soap opera where nothing really happened except Don remarried, had more affairs, and all the characters repeated their old patterns of behavior.
Which is why it took me so long to get around to watching Season 7, which was more of the same - only less well written. Weiner ties up all the loose strings and gives *almost* every character a happy ending, but at this point who cares? The acting, set design, and writing -scene by scene- is still great, but what made the TV series magical was lost years ago. Had Weiner not been blinded by $$$, he probably would've closed it out after Season 5.
Which is why it took me so long to get around to watching Season 7, which was more of the same - only less well written. Weiner ties up all the loose strings and gives *almost* every character a happy ending, but at this point who cares? The acting, set design, and writing -scene by scene- is still great, but what made the TV series magical was lost years ago. Had Weiner not been blinded by $$$, he probably would've closed it out after Season 5.
Friday, February 17, 2017
March or Die
Its much worse then I remember. The producers tried to cover all the bases and ended up covering nothing. To appeal to Americana audiences we get Hackman, completely miscast as a French colonel always babbling about his "Men in the trenches". And we get a far too English Moroccan leader, and a whole bunch of European actors in one-note cliched roles as the soldiers.
To appeal to the action/adventure crowd we get some action scenes and the brutal Foreign legion training scenes. OTOH, to avoid any 1970s charges of being a "flag-waver or pro-war" we get plenty of cynicism, nasty characters, and a downbeat ending.
There's very little action until the end, and even that is the typical "natives attack in droves and get shot down" nonsense. Before that its just blah, blah, and some sort of love affair with Catherine Deneuve.
The first 2/3 of the movie is very "Low energy" as Trump would put it.
Not recommended.
BTW, I'm not sure what American actor could have done a better job in Hackman's part. George C. Scott? William Holden? But Gene really isn't a leading man nor could have pulled off the combination of nobility and cynicism that this part required.
Under the Volcano (1984)
Having read the book, which was great, I was looking forward to the movie. However, the book simply doesn't translate well into film. We get a good performance by Albert Finney, but the whole is thing is sluggish and un-involving. I struggled to get through it.
Total Recall (2012) and Jobs
Jobs - Got the Dvd from the Library and was amazed at how bad it was. I thought it was just me. I didn't really like the real Steve Jobs and don't like all the worship of Tech Giants and Businessmen in general. Afterwards, I saw it had an IMDB rating of 5.6. So, I felt vindicated.
Total Recall (2012) - A remake of the popular SF Arnold Schwarzenegger movie about a man who has a "memory implantation" and everything goes wrong. Given the advance in CGI, and a chance to improve on the original this SHOULD be better. But it isn't. Its much less funny and much dumber than the 1990 version. The special effects ARE better, but that's it. Even worse is the moronic "You go girl" action feminism. In the original, it was stupid enough when 130 lbs. Sharon Stone got into a physical fight with 200 lbs, ripped Arnold. In this version, Kate Beckinsale physically overpowers (using a Headlock!) Colin Farrell and almost beats him to a pulp. How you can remake a popular movie, spend more money, use almost the same plot, and still come out with a loser is beyond me.
Total Recall (2012) - A remake of the popular SF Arnold Schwarzenegger movie about a man who has a "memory implantation" and everything goes wrong. Given the advance in CGI, and a chance to improve on the original this SHOULD be better. But it isn't. Its much less funny and much dumber than the 1990 version. The special effects ARE better, but that's it. Even worse is the moronic "You go girl" action feminism. In the original, it was stupid enough when 130 lbs. Sharon Stone got into a physical fight with 200 lbs, ripped Arnold. In this version, Kate Beckinsale physically overpowers (using a Headlock!) Colin Farrell and almost beats him to a pulp. How you can remake a popular movie, spend more money, use almost the same plot, and still come out with a loser is beyond me.
The Angry hills (1959) - Sword of Doom (1966)
The Angry Hills (1959) – Robert Mitchum stars as an American journalist in 1941 Greece who becomes involved with the Greek resistance after the German invasion. Well cast and well acted, it is beautifully shot in Greece by Robert Aldrich. The actresses in particular are good and very beautiful. However, it’s also un-involving, rambling and sometimes downright dull. Blame the script or maybe the source novel by Leon Uris. A movie about the Greek Civil War probably would’ve been more interesting and done better box office in 1959.
Sword of Doom (1966) - A disappointment. The film tells the story of a sociopath samurai who leaves a trail of blood and vendettas wherever he goes. Well acted and photographed, l was expecting a little more given the high praise and the Criterion release. Our anti-hero Samurai is interesting at first, but his lack of emotion and unchanging attitude soon turns him – and his story - into a bore. After an hour, I no longer cared if he lived or died. Even worse, are the silly fights where one Samurai kills 15 opponents. Like Bruce Lee’s clay pigeons - no one thinks of attacking him all at once. Too bad, because the supporting characters are quite good and the film seems like a life-like portrayal of Feudal Japan (actually the 1850s).
Sword of Doom (1966) - A disappointment. The film tells the story of a sociopath samurai who leaves a trail of blood and vendettas wherever he goes. Well acted and photographed, l was expecting a little more given the high praise and the Criterion release. Our anti-hero Samurai is interesting at first, but his lack of emotion and unchanging attitude soon turns him – and his story - into a bore. After an hour, I no longer cared if he lived or died. Even worse, are the silly fights where one Samurai kills 15 opponents. Like Bruce Lee’s clay pigeons - no one thinks of attacking him all at once. Too bad, because the supporting characters are quite good and the film seems like a life-like portrayal of Feudal Japan (actually the 1850s).
The Revenant
The Revenant (2015)- What impressive cinematography, direction, and special effects! The acting was good too. Too bad the producers didn't spend more time on the script and creating characters I could care about.
Minor nitpicks: men can't spend time in raging ice-cold river without dying of hypothermia. People before 1900 actually washed their clothes and faces. Men in 1820 knew how to use muskets and wouldn't have gone into hostile Indian territory without taking precautions. And all that PC nonsense stuffed into the mouth of a Pawnee about the "White man stealing our land and our women" - whatever dude.
Minor nitpicks: men can't spend time in raging ice-cold river without dying of hypothermia. People before 1900 actually washed their clothes and faces. Men in 1820 knew how to use muskets and wouldn't have gone into hostile Indian territory without taking precautions. And all that PC nonsense stuffed into the mouth of a Pawnee about the "White man stealing our land and our women" - whatever dude.
Five Came Back (1939) & Back from Eternity (1956)
I enjoyed it immensely, and it good to see the great cast at work especially, C. Aubrey Smith and John Carradine. However, I disagree with many, because I like the 1950s remake (Back from Eternity) just as much.
They're the same film, more or less, but with different strengths. The '39 moves quickly and focuses in on the plot. The '56 version is almost 25 minutes longer (still a short 100) and gives our characters more lines, background and conflict. Certainly, Robert Ryan, Steiger, and Phyllis Kirk make more of an impression than their '39 counterparts.
The '39 passengers and crew are much more elite lot than the '56 bunch for obvious reasons. Airline travel was only for the rich and famous and so everyone is much wealthier (except for Vasquez and his 'Escort'). Lucille Ball's character is somewhat puzzling. In the '56 version Eckberg is more or less forced to go to Brazil, while its never made clear why Lucy in her stunning mink stole is going to Panama City. Other differences, in the '39 version the Steward is a man, the passengers have sleeping compartments, and a radio plays music and news during the flight.
The geography of the '39 version is a little hazy. I'm not clear how they aimed for Panama City but ended up in the Amazon basin, since it would've been out of their range. The '56 version make it more believable, they are actually flying over the Amazon basin on the way to Brazil.
They're the same film, more or less, but with different strengths. The '39 moves quickly and focuses in on the plot. The '56 version is almost 25 minutes longer (still a short 100) and gives our characters more lines, background and conflict. Certainly, Robert Ryan, Steiger, and Phyllis Kirk make more of an impression than their '39 counterparts.
The '39 passengers and crew are much more elite lot than the '56 bunch for obvious reasons. Airline travel was only for the rich and famous and so everyone is much wealthier (except for Vasquez and his 'Escort'). Lucille Ball's character is somewhat puzzling. In the '56 version Eckberg is more or less forced to go to Brazil, while its never made clear why Lucy in her stunning mink stole is going to Panama City. Other differences, in the '39 version the Steward is a man, the passengers have sleeping compartments, and a radio plays music and news during the flight.
The geography of the '39 version is a little hazy. I'm not clear how they aimed for Panama City but ended up in the Amazon basin, since it would've been out of their range. The '56 version make it more believable, they are actually flying over the Amazon basin on the way to Brazil.
Outcast of the Islands (1951)
Based on the Conrad novel of the same name, Outcast of the Islands stars Trevor Howard, Ralph Richardson, and Robert Morley. Set in SE Asia at the turn of the 20th century it concerns a man sacked for stealing who's then befriended by Sea Captain and sent to a secret trading post.
Outcast has some great photography and acting but just misses being a great movie due to a sometimes sluggish story and lack of likable characters. Both the Morley and Howard characters are unlikable and far too much of the movie is about their slow motion train-wreck of a relationship.
It should have been shorter or had more drama. Perhaps Reed felt he had to stick close to the novel. Bad mistake.
Outcast has some great photography and acting but just misses being a great movie due to a sometimes sluggish story and lack of likable characters. Both the Morley and Howard characters are unlikable and far too much of the movie is about their slow motion train-wreck of a relationship.
Further, Reed beats us over the head with Howard's relationship with a native woman, constantly showing us the two love birds giving each other wistful, yearning, glances. After seeing this for the 10th straight time, I literally yelled at the screen "Yes, I get it. Move on".
It should have been shorter or had more drama. Perhaps Reed felt he had to stick close to the novel. Bad mistake.
Bridge of Spies (2015)
Another Hanks-Spielberg collaboration, this one concerns the trial of soviet spy "Col Abel" and his subsequent swap for Gary Powers (shot down U-2 Pilot) in 1961.
As usual with Spielberg's serious movies, everything looks fantastic, Hanks is good, and the direction is solid. Technically, the movie is fine. The problem is the script/story. No matter how SS tries to spice it up, this is just another long talky movie about a lawyer, talking to people. And if you know the history, you already know how the whole thing turned out before you even bought your ticket. So it didn't really have much impact for me.I would've liked a movie about Gary Powers more.
We also get Hollywood's usual odd take on the 50s and early 60s. The FBI guys are all beefy, the CIA guys are slightly sinister and look like WASP's from the Yale Skull and Bones club, the Military guys are macho, vulgar, and somewhat stupid, and the Russian spies are painfully correct uber professionals. We get a lot of "Rah, rah, the constitution" including the weird idea that Donovan's getting a soviet spy off on an absurd legal technicality is somehow a great noble thing. And then there's all those mindless NYC Anti-communists shooting bullets into Hanks' house and sneering at him on the subway for defending a "Commie rat". Who knew NYC was such a Right-wing hotbed.
As usual with Spielberg's serious movies, everything looks fantastic, Hanks is good, and the direction is solid. Technically, the movie is fine. The problem is the script/story. No matter how SS tries to spice it up, this is just another long talky movie about a lawyer, talking to people. And if you know the history, you already know how the whole thing turned out before you even bought your ticket. So it didn't really have much impact for me.I would've liked a movie about Gary Powers more.
We also get Hollywood's usual odd take on the 50s and early 60s. The FBI guys are all beefy, the CIA guys are slightly sinister and look like WASP's from the Yale Skull and Bones club, the Military guys are macho, vulgar, and somewhat stupid, and the Russian spies are painfully correct uber professionals. We get a lot of "Rah, rah, the constitution" including the weird idea that Donovan's getting a soviet spy off on an absurd legal technicality is somehow a great noble thing. And then there's all those mindless NYC Anti-communists shooting bullets into Hanks' house and sneering at him on the subway for defending a "Commie rat". Who knew NYC was such a Right-wing hotbed.
Game of Thrones - Seasons 1-2 and Season 6
Seasons 1 and 2 - Having just polished off, the first two books by George Rape Rape Martin, I thought I'd go back and re-view the TV series. And boy, what a disappointment! Some shows get better on more viewings others don't, and GoT is one of the don't.
The whole things seems incredibly disjointed with lots of nudity, blood/gore, beatings and sex tossed in to keep people interested. The casting and acting hold up, especially Dinklage as "Tyrian" and Fairley as "Cat" - the TV show also adds some spectacular scenery that's not in the book. Other differences: The roles of Jamie and John Snow are greatly expanded and that of Rob, Bran and Theon reduced.
BTW, If you decide to read all five huge books in the series, I'd suggest you skip "A Feast of Crows" - its easily the weakest book and nothing much happens plot-wise.
Season 6 - Jumped the shark. Just saw the entire season on DVD. No more intrigue or complex characters just action-fantasy. Good action - but that's a big comedown from the plot twists and sometimes sparkling dialogue of the first 4 Seasons.
Characters coming back from the dead, pointless battles, predictable plot points, and the story just spinning its wheels until Season 8 and final big battle for the throne. Four of the best characters: Tryrion, Jaime, Littlefinger, Varys, have been sidelined.
Hopefully, Season 7 will get back on track.
The whole things seems incredibly disjointed with lots of nudity, blood/gore, beatings and sex tossed in to keep people interested. The casting and acting hold up, especially Dinklage as "Tyrian" and Fairley as "Cat" - the TV show also adds some spectacular scenery that's not in the book. Other differences: The roles of Jamie and John Snow are greatly expanded and that of Rob, Bran and Theon reduced.
BTW, If you decide to read all five huge books in the series, I'd suggest you skip "A Feast of Crows" - its easily the weakest book and nothing much happens plot-wise.
Season 6 - Jumped the shark. Just saw the entire season on DVD. No more intrigue or complex characters just action-fantasy. Good action - but that's a big comedown from the plot twists and sometimes sparkling dialogue of the first 4 Seasons.
Characters coming back from the dead, pointless battles, predictable plot points, and the story just spinning its wheels until Season 8 and final big battle for the throne. Four of the best characters: Tryrion, Jaime, Littlefinger, Varys, have been sidelined.
Hopefully, Season 7 will get back on track.
Hail Caesar and Star Trek IV
Hail Caesar! - The Coens latest satire of old time Hollywood, I found it disappointing and disjointed. Yes, there are some great scenes and some good acting, but nothing memorable. A definite cut below "Barton Fink".
Star trek IV - a nice little star trek movie, more light-heated and comic than previous ones. Our Gang beams down to 1980s San Francisco to save the earth by saving the Humpback whale. Seeing the location shots of 80s SF was a hoot, although I don't remember the place being that ugly.
Star trek IV - a nice little star trek movie, more light-heated and comic than previous ones. Our Gang beams down to 1980s San Francisco to save the earth by saving the Humpback whale. Seeing the location shots of 80s SF was a hoot, although I don't remember the place being that ugly.
Love in the Afternoon (1956)
Not as bad as I remember but Cooper's awful performance sinks the film from ***1/2 to **1/2.
Honestly, what was Wilder thinking? Yeah he couldn't get Cary Grant so his go-to-guy was 56 - going on 66- Cooper? What about Holden? What about Hudson, What about Gable (if want to go old)? Or he could have brought William Powell out of retirement.
Its not just that. Even if it was a younger Cooper who thinks of "Coop" as an international, sophisticated playboy? His bread and butter was playing Cowboys and upright American heroes, and charming small town guys.
OTOH, Hepburn was 28 and convincingly plays 18-19 and Maurice C. is his usual great self. Another flaw - at over 2 hours - just too long. His idol was Lubitsch, maybe he should have copied the Masters brevity - Shop around the corner, to be or not to be, and Trouble in Paradise are 100 minute or less.
Honestly, what was Wilder thinking? Yeah he couldn't get Cary Grant so his go-to-guy was 56 - going on 66- Cooper? What about Holden? What about Hudson, What about Gable (if want to go old)? Or he could have brought William Powell out of retirement.
Its not just that. Even if it was a younger Cooper who thinks of "Coop" as an international, sophisticated playboy? His bread and butter was playing Cowboys and upright American heroes, and charming small town guys.
OTOH, Hepburn was 28 and convincingly plays 18-19 and Maurice C. is his usual great self. Another flaw - at over 2 hours - just too long. His idol was Lubitsch, maybe he should have copied the Masters brevity - Shop around the corner, to be or not to be, and Trouble in Paradise are 100 minute or less.
Hacksaw Ridge (2016)
Mel Gibson's new movie is a good one but suffers from the usual problems bedeviling current mainstream movies namely excessive and over-the-top violence, unbelievable action sequences, and characters that sometimes ring false (despite being based on real life). Like Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan" you have to wonder if the Writers/Directors saw any of the old Hollywood war movies, since those old movies were able to draw you into the characters and make them real. Its amazing how a film like "battleground" or Best of your lives can make you feel you are watching realistic average Americans, while 21st Century movies always seem off for some reason.
The movie follows the life of Desmond Doss, a medic a conscientious objector, who refused to carry a gun, but saved the lives of over 75 men during the battle of Okinawa and won the Medal of Honor. The movie follows his life in small town Virginia, then his problems in basic training and finally his exploits in the Battle of Okinawa.
The acting is well done as is the direction. Garfield is fine in the leading role. Oddly almost all the actors except Garfield are Aussies and all of them seem 'murican enough to fool me.
BTW - if you google it, you'll see the real life William Doss was even more amazing than in the movie. He was incredible man both good and courageous. The movie really doesn't do him justice.
The movie follows the life of Desmond Doss, a medic a conscientious objector, who refused to carry a gun, but saved the lives of over 75 men during the battle of Okinawa and won the Medal of Honor. The movie follows his life in small town Virginia, then his problems in basic training and finally his exploits in the Battle of Okinawa.
The acting is well done as is the direction. Garfield is fine in the leading role. Oddly almost all the actors except Garfield are Aussies and all of them seem 'murican enough to fool me.
BTW - if you google it, you'll see the real life William Doss was even more amazing than in the movie. He was incredible man both good and courageous. The movie really doesn't do him justice.
Star Trek - TNG - Reviews
The Measure of a Man - Plot: When Data is to be dismatled a hearing is convened to determine if he is a legal citizen or property of the Federation. Review: A highly rated episode that I found boring and obvious. Mediocre.
Q Who Plot: Q flings the Enterprise 7,000 light years beyond Federation space and introduces them to the deadly Borg. Review: One of the best TNG episodes I've seen so far. The first encounter with the Borg. The only drawback is Whoopie Goldberg's awful wooden acting.
Hide and Q Plot: Q tempts Commander Riker into joining the Q Continuum. Review: Another mediocre episode. Another obvious episode. Who ever thought Riker would join Q? And the awfulness of suporting characters/actors Denise Crosby, Wesley, and LaForge is truly depressing.
A Matter of Honor - Riker gets a chance to shine when he becomes the first human "exchange Officer" on board a Klingon ship. This episode is well done, but the Klingons (especially the Captain) are shown in almost cartoonish way, compared to the TOS Klingons. Evidently, in 20 years the screenwriters forgot how to portray a warrior, honor based culture without resorting to Macho Stupidity.
[quote]
The Neutral Zone - While the Romulans are portrayed well at the end, this is another missed TNG opportunity. The interesting plot - the Enterprise finds and revives 3 survivors from the 1980s who were cryonicly frozen is wasted. The 3 survivors are an obnoxious money-mad businessman, a good-time drunkard, and a dull young mother. The guest stars can't breathe much life into these dull stereotypes and a chance to address issues of life/death/advance of civilization in a meaningful way is lost.
Conspiracy I'm beginning to detect a pattern. Like the previous two episodes, this one has an interesting story that fails in the execution. An old time friend suspects Star Fleet has been infiltrated by outsiders and asks Picard for help. The first half is gripping until the outsiders start beating people up for no reason and the whole thing turns into a bad ripoff of the movie Alien.
Drumbeat - Pretty good episode guest staring Jean Simmons (of all people) as an Admiral who's out of find a spy whether there is one or not. Simmons does an excellent job of being likable and feminine at the start before turning into a rather nasty character. Flaw: Too many pompous speeches by Picard.
Inner Light - This is pretty much a one man show as Picard awakens to find he is on a planet, with a wife and a new identity. A touching show. A showcase for Stewart to show he can do something more than say "make it so".
Best of Both Worlds, Parts 1&2 - The first encounter with "The Borg". An exciting episode that is suspenseful and well written. Sadly, this in episode that makes me miss Spock, McCoy, and Scotty. Riker and his new subordinate (a manly, uber-ambitious female) don't have the charisma and likability to handle the subplot. Whoppi Goldberg shows up and wastes at least 10 minutes of film.
Elementary My Dear Data (Season 2). One of the better Season 2 episodes. During Sherlock Holmes holodeck RPG scenario the Prof. Moriarty character accidentally becomes self-aware. This episode starts out slow but becomes more and more interesting as we find Moriarty character wants to live outside the game. Like most time travel and holodeck episodes this doesn’t really make a lot of sense but it’s a fun episode and somewhat thoughtful That Moriarty isn’t made into a monster or destroyed in a fist-fight ala TOS is a plus.
Star Trek - First Contact (1994) A dull Star trek movie with the charisma free TNG cast. Feels like a mediocre 2 hour TV episode. When Captain Picard runs into a sassy machine gun toting black women you know you’re not in a quality movie.
Q Who Plot: Q flings the Enterprise 7,000 light years beyond Federation space and introduces them to the deadly Borg. Review: One of the best TNG episodes I've seen so far. The first encounter with the Borg. The only drawback is Whoopie Goldberg's awful wooden acting.
Hide and Q Plot: Q tempts Commander Riker into joining the Q Continuum. Review: Another mediocre episode. Another obvious episode. Who ever thought Riker would join Q? And the awfulness of suporting characters/actors Denise Crosby, Wesley, and LaForge is truly depressing.
A Matter of Honor - Riker gets a chance to shine when he becomes the first human "exchange Officer" on board a Klingon ship. This episode is well done, but the Klingons (especially the Captain) are shown in almost cartoonish way, compared to the TOS Klingons. Evidently, in 20 years the screenwriters forgot how to portray a warrior, honor based culture without resorting to Macho Stupidity.
[quote]
The Neutral Zone - While the Romulans are portrayed well at the end, this is another missed TNG opportunity. The interesting plot - the Enterprise finds and revives 3 survivors from the 1980s who were cryonicly frozen is wasted. The 3 survivors are an obnoxious money-mad businessman, a good-time drunkard, and a dull young mother. The guest stars can't breathe much life into these dull stereotypes and a chance to address issues of life/death/advance of civilization in a meaningful way is lost.
Conspiracy I'm beginning to detect a pattern. Like the previous two episodes, this one has an interesting story that fails in the execution. An old time friend suspects Star Fleet has been infiltrated by outsiders and asks Picard for help. The first half is gripping until the outsiders start beating people up for no reason and the whole thing turns into a bad ripoff of the movie Alien.
Drumbeat - Pretty good episode guest staring Jean Simmons (of all people) as an Admiral who's out of find a spy whether there is one or not. Simmons does an excellent job of being likable and feminine at the start before turning into a rather nasty character. Flaw: Too many pompous speeches by Picard.
Inner Light - This is pretty much a one man show as Picard awakens to find he is on a planet, with a wife and a new identity. A touching show. A showcase for Stewart to show he can do something more than say "make it so".
Best of Both Worlds, Parts 1&2 - The first encounter with "The Borg". An exciting episode that is suspenseful and well written. Sadly, this in episode that makes me miss Spock, McCoy, and Scotty. Riker and his new subordinate (a manly, uber-ambitious female) don't have the charisma and likability to handle the subplot. Whoppi Goldberg shows up and wastes at least 10 minutes of film.
Elementary My Dear Data (Season 2). One of the better Season 2 episodes. During Sherlock Holmes holodeck RPG scenario the Prof. Moriarty character accidentally becomes self-aware. This episode starts out slow but becomes more and more interesting as we find Moriarty character wants to live outside the game. Like most time travel and holodeck episodes this doesn’t really make a lot of sense but it’s a fun episode and somewhat thoughtful That Moriarty isn’t made into a monster or destroyed in a fist-fight ala TOS is a plus.
Star Trek - First Contact (1994) A dull Star trek movie with the charisma free TNG cast. Feels like a mediocre 2 hour TV episode. When Captain Picard runs into a sassy machine gun toting black women you know you’re not in a quality movie.
Mr. Soft Touch - Fastest Gun Alive
Mr. Soft Touch (1949). Gangster on-the-run Glenn Ford hides out at Evelyn Keyes’ mission tenement house over Christmas. A quirky, interesting, 90 minute movie that seems to be part Christmas movie, part film-noir and part comedy/romance. Ford shows his range as he effortlessly alternates between comedy, romance, and tough guy violence. Keyes is quite touching as the good-hearted mission leader who falls for Ford. Unfortunately, the plot often meanders and Ford’s character is quite unbelievable. Some may find the constant changes in tone jarring. ***
Fastest Gun Alive (1956) A nice little western. Glenn Ford does an excellent job as a former gun fighter trying to forget the past in a small town. Jeanne Crain and some good character actors lend support. On the downside: the story is predictable variation on High noon & The Gunfighter and the casting of Broderick Crawford as a ruthless Cowboy is inexplicable. In real life, Crawford was Ford’s senior by 5 years, but on-screen he looks more like Glenn Ford’s fat Uncle than a dangerous quick-draw nemesis. ***
Fastest Gun Alive (1956) A nice little western. Glenn Ford does an excellent job as a former gun fighter trying to forget the past in a small town. Jeanne Crain and some good character actors lend support. On the downside: the story is predictable variation on High noon & The Gunfighter and the casting of Broderick Crawford as a ruthless Cowboy is inexplicable. In real life, Crawford was Ford’s senior by 5 years, but on-screen he looks more like Glenn Ford’s fat Uncle than a dangerous quick-draw nemesis. ***
Four By Fellini - Saytricon, City of Women, And the Ship Sailed on, Amarcord
106. Saytricon (1968) Fellini. Based on the Roman novel by Petronius. Fantasy about two gay Roman lovers and their various adventures. Full of grotesque, sometimes beautiful, sometimes interesting, images. Held my interest at first, primarily due to the images and great sets. But the characters are shallow and dull - as is the meandering, episodic story. Images aren't enough especially when the sexual imagery - isn't sexy. I want my Roman Decadence with beautiful young babes - not fat old men, and Gay Romans. Rating **
City of Women - Man what a disappointment. I was hoping some of the criticism was politically motivated (its supposedly Anti-feminist) but no its just a bad movie. Of course, with Fellini there are always a few good scenes and striking images. The acting is good, but the story is so disjointed, repetitive, and goofy its hard to care.
And the Ship Sailed On - A quirky fable, about a group of European aristocrats aboard a luxurious ocean liner. I loved the look of this film and the story. As usual, with Fellini you get some major league weirdness and some scenes that don't work but in this case its counterbalanced by some very good ones. I enjoyed this much more than the tedious, repetitive Satyricon and the vulgar, uneven Amarcord. A must see. ****
Amarcord - I liked this better the 2nd time round, since I didn't have my hopes up. The vulgarity seemed less grating this time and *most* of it is quite warm and funny although sometimes the family seemed like a collection of Italian stereotypes. Like all comedies, you wonder how much you're missing if you don't speak the native tongue. Some say this is Fellini's best movie, I'd place it behind Variety Nights, 8 1/2, La Dolce Vita, I Vitelloni and Nights of Cabiria.
City of Women - Man what a disappointment. I was hoping some of the criticism was politically motivated (its supposedly Anti-feminist) but no its just a bad movie. Of course, with Fellini there are always a few good scenes and striking images. The acting is good, but the story is so disjointed, repetitive, and goofy its hard to care.
And the Ship Sailed On - A quirky fable, about a group of European aristocrats aboard a luxurious ocean liner. I loved the look of this film and the story. As usual, with Fellini you get some major league weirdness and some scenes that don't work but in this case its counterbalanced by some very good ones. I enjoyed this much more than the tedious, repetitive Satyricon and the vulgar, uneven Amarcord. A must see. ****
Amarcord - I liked this better the 2nd time round, since I didn't have my hopes up. The vulgarity seemed less grating this time and *most* of it is quite warm and funny although sometimes the family seemed like a collection of Italian stereotypes. Like all comedies, you wonder how much you're missing if you don't speak the native tongue. Some say this is Fellini's best movie, I'd place it behind Variety Nights, 8 1/2, La Dolce Vita, I Vitelloni and Nights of Cabiria.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)