Escape From New York (1981)

Plot: Set in a future Dystopia where Manhattan is a high security prison, convict Snake Plissken is sent in to rescue the President of the United States.

This was one fun action movie. All that's missing are a few Arnold Swargenagger one-liners. Getting old pros like Ernie Borgnine and Lee van cleef to support Russell was a stroke of genius casting. Little did the filmmakers know that NYC in 1997 would not be a burnt out shell but one of the most richest places in the world.

Overlord (1975)

Plot: During World War II, a young British lad's called up and, with increasing sense of foreboding, undertakes his army training for D-day

Lets be honest, most war movies that pretend to be "anti-war", really aren't. Our hero may go through hell but survives. Or if he does dies, its a hero's death, in the last few minutes. So, I often wondered, what if a war movie tried to be different, and had John Wayne or Tom Hanks killed in the first reel. That would not only be more shocking, it would be more realistic.

And "Overlord" sorta does this. Filmed on a low-budget and only 83 minutes, the movie incorporates lots of actual WW II footage. It does this so well, it seems part of movie. The actual footage is used to give a sense of realism, as we follow an average Englishman as he goes through basic training to his first battle, D-Day. Where he is killed, before he steps off the landing craft.

Its different. And interesting. But not particularly entertaining. And not suitable for a commercial movie that wants to put "Bums on the seats". And the hero is just an average man. And not charismatic.

 Its an good experimental film. It shows up the fakery and childishness of war movies like Private Ryan with their cartoon heroics and flag-waving propaganda. But that doesn't make it the sort of movie you'd pay money to see.

Barking Dogs Never Bite (2000)

Barking dogs never bite: unpolished, leisurely, often funny, sometimes dull korean comedy. I’m sure a lot of the comedy got lot in translation, but this dark comedy about Dog killers had me laughing a few times. But while there are quite a few humorous moments,  too often the film just seems to be marking time, and all the leading characters seem likable but muted. The humor is often realistic, which jokes are more “one off” than building off each other. The director throws in quite a bit of social commentary. The obvious point is that Korean society cares more about dogs than their poor.

Highpoint has to be the “Boiler Jim” story, and the heroine’s rescue of the dog at the end: Other good bits:

•  The heroine expects to get large sum from “Granny” but instead she only get dried radishes
•  Several clerks approvingly watch a Chinese women fight a bank robber
•  The absurd story of a man who get drunk, leans over the tracks to vomit, and gets hit by a train
• A man tries to dispose of a barking dog, but finds something or someone always frustrating him.

Again, probably a lot of the humor probably went over my head, since comedy is often about violating societal norms. And what may be considered outrageous or Kooky behavior in Korea might not be in the USA. he film's Korean title is satirically named after the 1872 novel A Dog of Flanders, a European pet story that is very popular in parts of East Asia.

Star Trek TNG - Season 3

Sins of the Father:  This is my favorite 3rd Season Episode so far.  We get some excellent "World Building" as Worf goes before the Klingon High Council to defend his Father's name, after discovering he has a younger brother.  Tony Todd is completely believable as a Klingon and as Worf's brother.  I loved the look of the Klingon World too.  Great set design.  Bad things?  Well, the Klingon's do shout quite a bit, don't they?

Yesterday’s Enterprise: Supposedly one of TNG’s best episodes (9.2 rating) but I didn’t like it much. It shows up TNG’s greatest flaw, casting. The producers were so interested in winning diversity bingo, they skipped talent and fitting the part. The two guest stars are bland and the female one is completely unbelievable as the former Captain of the Enterprise. How can you go from Picard/Kirk to her? Sorry no sale. Meanwhile, we get far too much of the wretched Whoopi with her silly outfits and bad acting. Rounding out the horror show is Ms. Crosby with a butch haircut and dull personality.

Deja Q - A fun, comic episode with Q having to deal with being busted down to Human. Of course, its only temporary and the episode ends with Q back to his omnipotent self. Making it even better is we get less Whoopi than normal. For reasons unknown to anyone but the Producers, they always guest-star Whoopi on a Q episode. Thank God for John de Lancie. Funniest line: “I’m not good in groups. It’s difficult to work in a group when you’re omnipotent.”

A Matter of Perspective – There’s nothing special about the story but I enjoyed this one, primarily because I’m a sucker for Rashomon type episodes and movies. It also gives Frakes a chance to do some acting.

Sarek – Absurdly overrated episode with old TOS favorite Mark Lenard. The years haven’t been kind to him, and he seems far too muted. The story itself is no great shakes. The problem is we cared about Sarek because he was Spock’s father. By himself, he wasn’t particularly interesting. You can say the same about Mark Lenard. He was fine in small doses as the supporting actor with a strong script, but not particularly good as “THE GUEST STAR”.

Hollow Pursuits -  Moderately amusing episode about an shy crewmember who's intimidated by his "Bosses" on the Enterprise and spends too much time in the Holodeck. This one probably hit home for a lot of "Trekkers" since so many of them are intelligent shy people who have escaped into the "Trek world".  Guest star Dwight Schultz does an amazing job with an underwritten part. And the comedy world of his Holodeck fantasy was quite amusing. But  there's just too much technobabble and too little plot. And last act is dull.  The writers  give us the usual "X overcomes his handicap and saves the day" Highpoint was Picard as a Musketeer and the real Riker talking to a Holodeck Riker. 

The Most Toys - Picard and the gang think Data has been killed in a shuttle explosion but in fact has been kidnapped by a Collector/Trader of rare objects.  Well written, if overly familiar story that has two good things and two bad things.  The good? An excellent performance by Spiner and an interesting examination of Data's character.  The Bad? A mediocre guest star.  The part needed an actor with the charimsa of a Harry Mudd or Gul Dukat.   Instead, we get a snarky little weasal/nerd. His sidekick wasn't much better.  And I'm getting a little tired of every villian being a  white guy. Where are the female/black villians?     

Menage à Troi -  A Ferengi "Comedy"-  about as good as you'd expect. 

Transfigurations

The Burbs (1984)

Plot: A comedy. A strange, scary, family moves into a suburban neighorbood - making everyone curious
Stars: Carrie Fisher, Tom Hanks, Bruce Dern

Comedy is subjective, and I didn't find this one funny.  Dern (playing his weirdness for laughs) and likable Hanks  have a few good moments, but there's just too much yelling, overly-broad comedy and silliness for my taste.  Also,  the supporting cast wasn't that good.  I kept wishing John Candy was in it.  The 'burbs, gets worse as it goes along,  by the 70 minute mark I was pushing the FF button.

Typical Joke: 

Ray Peterson: I've never seen that. I've never seen anybody drive their garbage down to the street and bang the hell out of it with a stick. I-I've never seen that.

Prince of the City (1981)

Plot: A NYC Detective decides to expose corruption in the police force. Based on a non-ficiton book.

I got sad about half-way through Prince of the City. It had started out so well and had so many good Cop characters and supporting actors. Along with quite a few realistic, well done, action scenes.  I liked Treat Williams too.

But after while, it just got to be too much.
Too un-focused , too confusing, too little plot movement, too many characters, too many lawyers, too many dull court scenes, too many scenes of regret and shame, too much gloom, too much overacting, and too many perfunctory family scenes. Not to mention, too dull.

I finally had to turn it off after 100 minutes (with 80 to go). It wasn’t a film, it was an endurance contest.

So what went wrong?
Two words: Sidney Lumet. Not only did the Producers give him almost creative carte blanche (and $10 million budget) they agreed to his demands of no stars, and a 3 hour run time. Throw in that he co-wrote the screen play in just 30 days, and you got the resulting mess. It takes Lumet 3 hours to get from A to A.

This movie should have been 2 hours, tops.
And the script should have been rewritten and made more focused and dramatic. This story needed better structure, fewer characters and more plot movement.

It also has two inherent problems

Its based on a true story (which limits the drama) and low-level Police corruption really isn’t that engrossing. Drama needs villains and corrupt policeman don't make good ones. Nor are the stakes that high. How upset can you get at NYC Cops shaking down drug dealers or skimming off drug dealer money? Or care about them being convicted?  I cared a little, but not 3 hours worth.

Highlights:  Gritty 1980 NYC and those Big cars.  Ron Karabatsos as a slimy bails bondman

The Gambler (1974)

Stars: James Caan, Lauren Hutton, Paul Sorvino

A pointless movie of a NYC college professor addicted to gambling and making huge risky bets. Driving the plot is Axel Freed (Caan)’s need to come up with $44,000 or face the wrath of the Mobsters. We follow him as makes even more crazy bets, sponges off his well-to-do Mother, and tries to appease and buy time from Loan sharks/Bookmakers. We also get some dull scenes with Axel teaching college students and we get the standard boyfriend-girlfriend scenes with Hutton.

This is NOT a nail-biting, “OMG how is Alex going to pay off the money and not get killed” thriller. It’s more of a leisurely character study of a self-destructive gambler. Even worse there’s really only one character: Axel Freed. And there's almost no humor or charm and very little entertainment. The Gambling scenes fail to transmit the thrill and excitement gamblers must experience.

The movie expects us to identify with Mr. Freed, be intrigued by him, and root for him. But that’s just a given - there's nothing put on the screen that makes us care.  He makes no effort to cure his gambling habit,  he's gotten in trouble before and gotten bailed out by his rich relatives, and outside of his gambling habit there's nothing particularly interesting about him.  By the end, I was tired of him. So, when Axel absurdly goes to Harlem and tries to bait a pimp into killing him,  one wishes it were so.  But sadly, he only manages to get his face slashed.

And Caan doesn’t help matters. He just doesn’t have the charisma/acting chops to draw us in. Caan’s too self-contained, its all surface emotion. We feel neither Axel’s ghastly compulsion nor his intermittent exultation. And Caan doesn’t wear well - he can’t “carry” a movie for 120 minutes.

Summary: Watching a young Paul Sorvino, and a few scenes of 1970s NYC was fun. And Hutton was attractive - but mostly I was bored with “The Gambler”. We get too many scenes of Caan driving a car, talking to college students, or talking to his mother. Or Axel telling some bookie “I’ll get your money, just wait”. Again, the whole thing seemed pointless.  A small time movie about a small-time man you  really wouldn't want to know. Who was the target audience for this?  I dunno.  It sure wasn't me.

The Mystery of James Caan

James Caan always seems to be a bigger star then he actually was. Partly, it was luck. He got co-star/supporting roles in memorable movies (Misery, Dick Tracy, Brian’s Song, and The Godfather) or was paired with a popular actress in one of thieir star vehicles (Funny Lady, Comes a Horseman). And partly it was because he was the darling of  Studio Execs/Producers and Pauline Kael in the 1970s. Robert Evans, for example, wanted Caan as “Michael” in the Godfather. And the director of “The Gambler” chose Caan over DeNiro for that role.

It’s not clear how popular Caan really was, because most of his starring movies in 70s weren’t very good and did mediocre business. After watching Thief and The Gambler, it’s clear he couldn’t carry a movie on his own. He just wasn’t in the same class as De Niro, Pacino, or Redford. 

Thief (1981)

Plot: A Jewel Thief hooks up with the mob, and learns to regret it.
Stars: James Caan, Tuesday Weld

Thief suffers from some big problems.

• We get a lot of scenes where we see Caan stealing stuff, but none of it is interesting or clever. It’s all tension free.  We never think Caan is in danger of being caught. And the ending shoot-out is bloody but boring
• Ala "Miami Vice" we get a pounding soundtrack.  But that cant make dull scenes exciting. 
• The entire Tuesday Weld subplot is boring. Its seems to serve two purposes: To pad out the movie and draw in women viewers. But Weld is given no believable dialogue and her character is paper thin.
• James Caan is usually a likable actor.  But the dialogue and delivery makes him unlikable. And he simply isn’t “Cool” enough or tough enough to carry off the Film noir dialogue. One hundred minutes of Jimmy Caan is too much, he just doesn’t  acting chops to carry a movie. This one needed Pacino or De Niro.
• I didn’t care about lead character. But then what’s to like? His surly attitude? His arrogance? His desire to be rich without working? His willingness to steal and kill?
• Unrealistic characters, dialogue, and situations. Caan is always the smartest guy in the room. Also, tougher, more skilled and more courageous. He’s a film-noir superman. His only mistake is trusting the Mob Boss in order to get a baby for his wife. Otherwise, he can out-talk, out-cuss, out-fight, out-steal, and out-shoot everyone. He always knows exactly where to go, and exactly what to do. And somehow, after 11 years in jail, he has no problem running a successful used car business. Or penetrating the mob bosses lair. Or stealing zillions in jewels
• In order to make this criminal our “Hero”, Michael Mann makes Caan the crook with the heart of gold. He owns a bar and used car lot and everyone loves him. After a heist, he shares a bag of bagels and small talk with an old black man fishing on the lake. He wants a family and a house with a white Pickett fence (just one more score), he rescues a damaged waitress who can’t have kids and marries her, he grieves for his “The father I never had” who dies in prison, and he wants nothing to do with stealing from homes, just big jewel heists or “cash”.
• And he’s the most noble man in the film. Unlike the mob boss, the corrupt cops, the crooked judges, and the nasty unfeeling social workers and adoption agency employees, this “Thief” just wants what’s right. Sure, he’s a crook who steals other people’s valuables, but damn it, he has principles!
• So when the mob boss betrays him, and kills his “Jimmy Caan worshipping” sidekick, he does what any superman/filmnoir/noble person would do. He blows up his car business, his house, his bar, and sends his wife/baby away with $400,000 dollars. And then kills the mob boss and six henchmen and then walks away. The only man in America with a code of honor.

Summary:  This was Michael Mann's first draft for Heat.  Watch that instead. 

Killer Joe (2011)

Plot: Based on an off-Broadway play, a Dallas Hitman helps a Trailer park family kill their mother for the insurance money
Stars: Matthew McConaughey, Juno Temple, Emile Hirsch

Sometimes disgusting, sometimes darkly funny, sometimes chilling, and sometimes dull, Killer Joe is always well acted. Particularly by McConaughey. In fact, he's the only reason to see the movie. There are some clever lines, but basically its a low budget, filmed play, with some silly fight scenes and ketchup violence.

Frankly, its hard to rate. I'm full of admiration for the well-cast actors, and the last 30 minutes or so held me spellbound. But the first 20 minutes, before "Killer Joe" talks about killing the mother aren't particularly interesting, and the "romance" scenes between "Killer Joe" and Dottie are equally dull. Even at 106 minutes the movie is far too long. There's no point in discussing the score or the Direction because its a filmed play.

Reading the reviews, the "sophisticated" MSM reviewers seem to like it, while many average reviewers regard the movie as "garbage" or "brutal and ugly" . The problem is its hard to tell what the movie was going for. If they were trying to make a black comedy "cartoon" with a family so horrible, we laugh at them, they failed. We do laugh at one hapless character because he's so completely cucked and dumb. But the other three family members aren't particularly funny. And the realistic gore and violence completely negates the comedy.

And 3 other factors reduced my enjoyment. The first was the depressing, downscale, "Trailer Trash" atmosphere. The second was the realization that only white texans/southerners can be portrayed this way. No Hollywood Film exec would allow people of color or Jews to be made such trashy degenerates. Even in jest.

And the third was unneccesssary sexual vulgarity and blood splattering violence. Of course, its Williams Friedkin, so I wasn't surprised.

Summary: I doubt I'll watch again, but I can't say I disliked the movie. Its incredibly uneven. There's a good movie in the material, but it needed someone with more taste and more talent at the helm

To Live and Die In LA (1986)

Plot: A Secret Service agent vows revenge against the Criminal kingpin who killed his partner
Stars: William Dafoe, William Peterson, John Pankow

In 1986 the film failed to connect with a mainstream audience and did modest business.  Its seems people thought it vulgar, souless and mechanical.  

And I  agree. I found it unoriginal, overly long, overly familiar, & often unbelievable. It’s the sort of action movie where the Heroes drive 50 MPH  the wrong way on a crowded freeway and never get a scratch. Or get shot at with a zillion bullets, all of which miss, while the soundtrack pounds away.

At the 30 minute mark,  I  told my wife "Hey, this is just like an episode of  Miami Vice"  And whatta y'know?  Michael Mann agreed, since he sued Friedkin for plagiarism.

The movie does have some good points.

 Dafoe is a good villain. The chases and action scenes are well executed, full of  absurdity and adrenaline. And we get some clever lines here and there.

Best Line:  That doesn't mean I'm gonna roll over and play informer. If you're looking for a pigeon, go to the park.

But the movie is underwritten, and slackly directed.

It more or less dies when people stop shooting and chasing each other.  And I kept hitting the FF button, because I either knew what was going to happen, or nothing was happening. And the characters are clichés. 

Cardboard Characters

William Peterson, the vengeful cop, isn’t really given a background or character. He’s a trope. “Plays by his own rules” “Will do anything to win” . So is his partner: he's the cop with ethics, who expresses doubts, but ultimately goes along. Dafoe is also a familiar trope: the suave ruthless villain who uses everyone, is an expert crook, drives a great car, has a great house, knows great art, and has a beautiful girlfriend. The women? Just ciphers there to be eye candy or engage in sex.  

Most Surprising Supporting Actor

Jane Leeves, aka Daphne Moon, shows up as one of the villains beautiful girlfriends!

At 2 hours, the movie doesn’t have enough plot to fill the time

So, Friedkin pads out the movie with some rather odd scenes. For example:

• A half-naked Dafoe working out and lifting weights
• Flashy night club dance scenes

• Our hero bungee jumping to the cheers of onlookers

• An irrelevant prologue about Arab terrorist trying to assassinate the President.
• A  meaningless showdown between Dafoe and a black hit man who’s botched the job.

What the Critics Said:
Not surprisingly, To Live and Die in L.A. received mixed reviews. 

The Washington Post said: "To Live and Die in L.A. will live briefly and die quickly in L.A., where God hath no wrath like a studio executive with bad grosses. Then again, perhaps it's unfair to hold this overheated and recklessly violent movie to the high standard established by Starsky and Hutch.” 

Time magazine:  "The movis has a brutal, bloated car-chase sequence pilfered from Friedkin's nifty The French Connection, - but its a fetid movie hybrid: Miami Vile.”

Ziegfeld Girl (1941)

Plot:  In the 1920s, three young girls join the Ziegfeld Follies and find Fame and Tragedy
Stars: Judy Garland, James Stewart, Lana Turner, Heddy Lamar

Ziegfeld Girls has some great stars and great musical numbers, but I was often bored by the overlong (2 hours and 12 minute) often melodramatic story. And I kept wishing it was in color.  Turner and Garland steal the show.  Best musical numbers:

• Garland - "I'm Always chasing Rainbows"
• Garland - "Minnie From Trinidad".
• Winnager and Shean - " Mr. Gallagher And Mr. Shean"

Chinatown (1974)

Plot:  In 1930s Los Angeles,  a PI investigates the mysterious death of the LA Water Commisioner
Stars: Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunaway, John Huston, Diane Ladd

Chinatown has everything a great film-noir needs except wit, pacing, and action. Chandler wisecracks are missing and replaced by vulgar jokes. Memorable lines? None. Gone too is the sense of danger and excitement found in Double indemnity, Maltese Falcon, or The Big heat. Instead we get a film that is deliberate, sometimes slow to the point of dullness. The plot meanders; with too much focus on land deals and water rights. We even get a trip to the Owen’s Valley. And action? Well, we do get a knife to Nicholson’s nose, but mostly it’s just talk, talk, talk.

The film copies the old film noir’s -  but forgets what made them great. But it does improve on them, in some ways. The color photography is great. The acting is too, particularly Nicholson and Faye Dunaway. And movie tries to be more realistic.  Nicholson is no super-hero and no smarter than he should be.

But the greatest flaw is it exaggerates film-noir's “dark and gritty” aspect to the point of absurdity. If the older films had adultery, premarital sex, and (implied) homosexuality, Chinatown gives us not just incest, but double incest. If the old movie villains were cold-blooded gangsters and criminals, Chinatown gives us a villain who murders his own Son-in-law, and destroys entire Valleys. If the old films showed us police/poltical corruption,  this movie gives us the police shooting the Heroine to death (for no reason) and letting the Villain go off to make millions and commit incest.

Except for Nicholson and Dunaway, everyone is painted in dark colors, and the whole world is a black joke wrapped inside a pretentious riddle. “Forget it Jake, its Chinatown”. It’s quite a trip from Walter Neffs friendship with Keyes, or Marlow and Sam Spade getting justice.

But then the movie was made by Polanski, a man guilty of child rape, and who fled the USA to avoid punishment.  And has been applauded and showered with riches.  Maybe Noah Cross is a Polanski self-portrait.

Worst supporting actor
A tie between Polanski and John Huston. As a "hood", Polanski is no more menacing than a 12 y/o kid. Huston has a great voice/physical presence but can’t act. He’s Johnny one-note stone-face. Special mention goes to several clichéd “Hicks” and a Mexican boy on a horse.

Best Supporting Actor
Diane Ladd as “Ida Sessions”

Best quote
Evelyn Mulwray: Hollis seems to think you're an innocent man.
Jake Gittes: Well, I've been accused of a lot of things before, Mrs. Mulwray, but never that.

Worst Quote
A pointless 226 word racist “Joke” that had them rolling in the aisles in 1974

Best Scene
Nicholson’s first couple meetings with Dunaway

Worst Scene
In a campy scene worthy of SNL, Nicholson slaps the truth out of Dunaway. “She my daughter, She’s my sister,” She’s a topping and a floor wax! Special mention to two useless scenes: (1) Nicholson gets beat up by farmers and (2) talks to a child on horseback.

Rewatchablity 

Low. Once you know the plot, and all the twists and turns, Chinatown seems even more padded out and slow then it did the first time. In fact, on 2nd watch, the movie is shown to be hollow and  souless.  A plot held together by bubble gum and toothpicks.  One begins to notice things.  Like what's the point of Nicholson wearing a bandage on his nose, or  the weird exaggerated  veils and outfits the women wear. And how dull so many scenes are, and how bad the supporting actors are. And how fake the film's version of 1930s LA is. It comes off as a 70s Hollywood copy of a 40s Hollywood copy of reality.

Zardoz (1974)

Director John Boorman
Stars: Sean Connery, Charlotte Rampling.
Plot:  In the 23rd Century, a brutish trained killer finds his way into a community of bored immortals who've preserved humanity's achievements.

What Kael Thought:  A lushly photographed piece of twaddle....ideas skimmed off various systems of thought...a glittering cultural trashpile...the most fatuous movie since The Oscar... the passages between the laughs droop. 

A cult SF movie that is despised by  the majority of reviewers (5.6 IMDB rating).  Most find it absurd, others boring, and a few like it.  I found it very uneven, and I perfectly understand the low rating.  

The first act is boring and incomprehensible.  We get almost no dialogue, as we follow a half naked Sean Connery riding a horse, killing people, worshiping a floating stone head,  and being transported to the "Immortals" compound.  We have no idea what's going on - and what IS going on isn't that intresting. The whole section feels padded out and moves at a snails pace.  I'm sure most people never make it past the first 20 minutes.

But then it gets interesting.   In the second act, we learn Connery is amongst the "Immortals" who cant die and who are bored and can't have sex.  Connery is the subject of great interest and the next 45 mintues are quite engaging as we learn about this new society. It seems immortality isn't what its cracked up to be, and quite a few "Immortals" are unhappy.  And since its Sean Connery, quite a few are attracted to him. 

This is the best part of the movie,  beause the last act (35 minutes) is extremely drawn out.  We get a lot of chase scenes, people chanting and moaning,  weird cameras tricks and psychedelic special effects. And all to pad out the very simple plot:  Connery destroys the Vortex and brings death to the immortals.  The movie ends in a very cheesy scene, with "the exterminators" on horseback, coming in and killing all the immortals just like they had killed the "brutes" at the start.  Some of this is interesting but most of it is padding with no interesting dialogue. 

Summary:  I can see why most hate this movie and also why some like it. Its best seen on DVD, where you can FF past the boring, repetitive parts (which is to say about 50% of the movie).  The ideas behind the movie are derivitive but somewhat interesting,  and I'm sure clever people have read into the film more than what's actually there.  Boorman has some good things in the movie, but it needed a script doctor and bigger budget. 

Rewatchablity:  Low. Once you know the plot, a lot of the movie will be extremely boring. Probably the only way to rewatch would be to focus on Connery's interactions with Charlotte Rampling and Sara Kestelman and a few striking scenes and special effects.

Cruising - 1980

Plot: A serial killer is wrecking havoc on the Manhattan Gay "Leather Scene". Al Pacino goes undercover to catch the murderer.

Starring Al Pacino and directed by Academy award winner William Friedkin, Cruising was panned by the critics and did modest business in 1980. Nominated for a "Razzi" it lost out to Can't Stop the Music. Today its seems fairly popular (over 27,000 IMDB Votes) but poorly rated (IMDB Rating 6.5).

Pluses: Acting. Karen Allen, Paul Sorvino, and Pacino are all exellent in their parts.  Also, there are a few good action scenes and some realistic* (if stomach turning) gore.

Minus: The screenplay and story are terrible. Repetitive, sluggish, and unengaging. No memorable dialogue. Supporting characters are forgettable. Take out the Gay angle and its a TV-movie of week. Or an episode of NYPD Blue.

All the characters are boring, even the serial killer**. The atmosphere is unappealing with constant shots of a "shocking " Gay club, full of unattractive men in leather and odd outfits. No one in the movie is likable, except Karen Allen.

Summary: This mediocre movie should be forgotten. Only watched today due the famous people involved and cultural politics.

* =  The realism doesn't apply to the skin color of the actors.  This is Woody Allen Manhattan where 95 percent of the people are white. 
** = Absurdly, despite taking place in NYC, the killer is a WASP college student from St. Louis!

Dragnet 1967 - Season 3

This is probably the worst season of 1967 Dragnet. I only found about 8 episodes that are worth re-watching. Another 10 were unwatchable, and the rest were passable timewasters. At times, Dragnet season 3 seems like a public service program with episodes instructing people to not be bigoted, abuse  kids, or do drugs. We also get a lot of Pro-police propaganda, with Sgt Friday dueling with those who don't like "the fuzz". Or dull episodes about the inner workings of the police department like how (1) policewomen are trained or (2) the LA PD coordinates with the secret service . Solving crimes takes a backseat.

50 years later, this is very all dated and very boring.

On the plus side, Harry Morgan gets to show off his comedic talents, and Friday does solve a few crimes. Probably the best is Herb Mustin showing up as murder suspect. 

 Top Episodes:

1. S0306 - The Boys investigate a muder - but the witnesses wont talk
2. S0307 -  Friday/Gannon are assigned the Robbery Division Desk for a night
3. S0312 -  Investigation of Police Brutality -  Adam 12 leads show up
4. S0314 -  Herb Mustin is involved in Murder
5. S0317 -  Friday is under suspicion for corruption
6. S0320 -  A fraudster is cashing disability checks sent to dead people
7. S0321 -  Someone is stealing comic books and movie memorabilia
8. S0322 -  Friday/Gannon go undercover to break up an illegal gambling scam

Worst Episodes

S0301 -  Friday guests on a TV talk show with the topic "Who needs the police?"
S0303 -  Recruiting Blacks to the LA PD

S0304 -  Friday mans the command post when riots are forecast

S0308 -  Friday provides LA PD protection for the President

S0309 -  A reporter and Friday talk to Female police Cadets  

S0310 -  Small businessmen want to prevent crime - Friday helps out

S0311 -  Teens organize a club to stop drug use

S0313 -  Gannon /Friday attend a conference dealing with Predjudice

S0316 -  The boys help train a dog to sniff out MJ and other drugs

S0319 -  Friday lectures a Women's club about battered children 

Nightmare Alley (1947)

Plot: An amoral Tyrone Power rises from carnival barker to nightclub performer and becomes involved with a black-mailing pychiatrist.

This is widely considered Powers greatest performance, and I can't disagree. Power's is excellent as the ambitious con-man who tries to rise too far, too fast. In fact, everyone gives an excellent performance. The movie is perfectly cast, with Helen Walker as the standout supporting actor.

Nightmare Alley is an extremely well-done movie, and I wish I had enjoyed it more. The camera work is lush and its made with great craftsmanship. Unfortunately, I dislike Carnivals, mind readers, and magic shows. And the middle part of the movie dragged for me. The film was 110 minutes, and ten minutes in the middle could've been cut. However, it ends with a bang.

And I'm dubious about the Film-noir label. Its more of melodrama. The only crimes are fraudulent cons involving speaking to the dead. Can you really have film noir without murder, detectives, or a femme-fatale?

Best Scene: Helen gives Stan $150 instead of $150,00. When he gets angry, she convinces him he's going crazy.

Best Quote: I think you're a perfectly normal human being. Selfish and ruthless when you want something - generous and kindly when you've got it.

Agee's Review:

It would be unbearably brutal if it was played for all the humor, cynicism, and social observation impicit in it, It would be unbearably mawkish if it were played too solemnly. The movie makers have steered a middle course, now and then crudely but on the whole with tact, skill and power. They have seldom forgotten that the original novel they were adapting is essentially intelligent trash, and they have never forgotten that on the screen pretty exciting things can be made of trash. From top to bottom of the cast, the playing is good. Joan Blondell, as the fading carnival queen, is excellent and Tyrone Power – who asked to be cast in the picture – steps into a new class as an actor".

About Willliam Grehsam, the Author of the Original Novel:   

Gresham's life could have been the subject of a movie. Gresham had a life long battle with alcoholism, and was a communist from the late 30s (serving in the Abraham Lincoln Brigade)  till the mid 40s. He spent years in pyschoanalysis , then converted to Chrisitianity, and when that didn't take,  moved on to Ron Hubbarb's dianetics, and then to yoga/Hinduism. Grisham's pattern seems to have been falling for some "belief",  losing his "faith", and attacking it later.  His only consistency was his lifelong obession with carnivals and magic shows.  He died at 53 of mouth cancer (no doubt caused by a lifetime of drinking/smoking).  But he was honest about his talent:

I have no illusions about myself as an ‘author’—I am a hack writer who approaches writing as a trade like cabinet making. I have taught many classes in short story writing; the students probably learned very little but I always learned a lot, listening to myself sound off on how short fiction should be put together.

Hill Street Blues - Season 3

 Well, Police Story is looking better and better the more  “TV Cop shows” I watch. Hill Street Blues is awful. Incredibly the soap opera quotient exceeds that of NY PD Blue. And:

•  Characters were dull.
•  Too many characters and subplots.
•  Too much Talk, talk, talk.
•  The lead actor is good but charmless.
•  Dennis Franz is excellent but has limited screen time.
•  Everyone else is bland or mediocre. James Skiing in particular, is laugh-out loud terrible
•  Kiel Martin’s face looks like 30 miles of bad road.

Here’s what I’ve concluded. Unless you have some great writing, I don’t want to watch a TV show about characters/actors I don’t like or find boring. You’re a flawed character with issues? Do not care. You’re dark and gritty?  Do not care.  You're a groundbreaking character? Do not care. You’re a strong woman, a black authority figure, a Gay who's the first of his kind on TV?  Do not care. You're stark and realistic? Do not care.

Be likable. Be interesting. Or be gone.

NY PD Blue - Season 3

I like Dennis Franz, so I was looking forward to watching it. But, damn what a Soap Opera. And Franz, while good at being aggressive and tough,  has little charm and a limited acting range.  He doesn't wear well as the lead character.  There are several differences between this show and "Police Story":

• A lot more swearing
• A lot more sex crimes being investigated
• The Criminals are more repellent
• The actors are much less charismatic.  And much less likable

Sorry, I need more than "dark and gritty".  I need characters I care about.  And I didn't give a damn about these people. 

X-files - Season 1

X-files was fairly popular SF TV show - back in the 90s. And it was nominated for a ton of Emmy's. The show has two FBI agents "Scully" and "Mulder" investigating UFOs, alien abductions and conspiracies, the paranormal and various strange occurances.

Unfortunately, I didn't like the two stars of the show, and found their characters bland. And since they ARE the show, it was a tough slog. That's how old TV shows were. If you didn't lke the "stars" there was no point in watching them dominate 24 episodes a season.

Police Story - TV Series - Season 2

This was a real disappointment, 22 Episodes and only 6 or so were good. You can't blame the Guest Stars: Bill Shatner, Lloyd Bridges, Jim Backus, Don Meredith, Neville Brand, Robert Culp, Don Murray, etc.

The problem is the show is too realistic.  The focus is on the cops, not the villians. It shows how frustrating, stressful, and difficult a cop's job can be.  And that's not what I want to watch for 50 minutes.  And we get a new leading man every episode. And as you'd expect,  there's not a lot of humor.

And Good God, those awful 70s cars, clothes, and hairstyles.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)

Plot: In the small town of Santa Mira, a Doctor discovers his friends and neighbors are being replaced by emotionless aliens.
Stars: Kevin McCarthy, Diane Wynter, Carolyn Jones

SF Classic that has been remade many times. The original is still the best, since the camera work, acting, casting, and direction are very good, and at 80 minutes the story moves and never lets up. However, the set design, score, and special effects are at a B movie level. Producer/Director Don Siegel didn't have the budget to do better.

The film manages to cram a lot of plot into very little time. Like the 1978 version, the film neatly divides into three acts:

Act I -  We meet the main characters and find out that people are changing and no one knows why
Act II - Dr. Bennell and Jack Belicec find a pod person and try  to warn the authorities about the dangerous pods.

Act II -  Dr. Bennell and Becky Driscoll try to escape Santa Mira and warn the rest of America, while the police and pods chase after them.

The superiority of the 1956 version over the 1978 version 

1) The casting. Kevin McCarthy and Diane Wynter are much more attractive, and likable pair.

2)  Act I is much shorter,   We find the first Pod person at the 20 minute mark.  The '78 takes 40 minutes.

3)  The need for Dr. Bennell to escape and warn America,  is much more engaging. The pods have only taken over a small town, they can still be stopped.

4)  Seeing people's relatives, friends, and neighbors being turned into Pods is more impactful than seeing Big city strangers as is done in the 78 version.

5)  Dr. Bennell isn't a  Rambo,  he injects two men with knockout drugs, and hides in an old mine. That's it.

Best Scene:    Bennell kisses Becky and realizes she's turned Pod.

Best Quote:

Bennell : This is the oddest thing I've ever heard of. Let's hope we don't catch it. I'd hate to wake up some morning and find out that you weren't you.

Becky: I'm not the high school kid you used to romance, so how can you tell?

Bennell : You really want to know?

Becky : Yes

[Miles kisses Becky] 

Bennell: Mmmm, you're Becky Driscoll, all right!

Becky: Is this an example of your bedside manner, doctor?

Bennell : No, ma'am. That comes later.

Kauffman : Love, desire, ambition, faith - without them, life's so simple, believe me.

Bennell : I don't want any part of it.

Kauffman : You're forgetting something, Miles.

Bennell : What's that?

Kauffman : You have no choice.

Star Trek TNG - Ensign Ro

I had planned to write my usual brief reviews of TNG episodes, but I disliked "Ensign Ro" so much I decided to write more. Here's why I disliked it:

A Precursor to Dark and Gritty Star Trek
The episode is a teeing up the DS9 Franchise. Depending on who you read, Ensign Ro was supposed to be Sikso's Bajorian 2nd in Command  aka "Kira" played by Nana Visitor. This is our introduction to her, and Bajorians in general. Here they aren't a recently occupied planet, instead the Cardassians have forced them off Bajor and they exist in refugee camps and as "roaming nomads". But this episode introduces a lot of negative elements and thinly disguised 20th century politics we get on DS9:

Terrorism: The Bajorians have supposedly wiped out a Federation colony to attract attention to their cause

Cardassian atrocity porn: We listen to Ensign Ro tell us that as a child she was forced to watch her father be tortured to death - despite begging for mercy.

Double-dealing and lies: The Cardassians convince the Admiral  Kennelly that the Bajorians are terrorists. But *pysch* it was actually a false flag attack by the Cardassians. The Admiral then lies to Picard and tells him to negotiate and help the Bajorians, but *psych* his actual plan is to let the Cardassians destroy the Bajorians. The Admiral tells Picard Ensign Ro is under his command but *pysch*, he's secretely telling Ensign Ro what to do.Picard then lies to Admiral and pretends to allow the Cardassians to destroy the Bajorians on their ship but *pysch* its all a fake. The ship was empty.

Self-righteous victimhood: The Bajorians constantly throw their tragic fate in Picard's face, and demand why the Federation stood by and "let it happen".

Stupid/Dishonorable Star Fleet Command - Once again, the higher-ups are shown to be not just liars and stupid, but amoral in their convoluted plans.  Admiral Kennelly amorally uses Picard and Ro as his pawns to implement his secret plan to kill the terrorists. But he's too dumb to understand he's being used by the Cardassians.  So, we have the Cardassians using Star fleet command and the Command in turn using its subordinates in an immoral action.  

Obnoxious Ethnic Pride:  Because the Bajorians are "victims", Ensign Ro feels she has  the right to constantly remind everyone (1) that she's proud to be  Bajorian,  dammit, (2) she's not going to "assimilate" and (3)  that she's a VICTIM.  And (4) the Federation didn't help Bajor enough. Example: Ro tells Picard that Bajorians have their last name first. And he'd better understand that. 

Picard acts like a total cuck and accepts this.  He then tells us that "the Bajorians were philosphers and artists when humans hadn't learned to walk errect." Later, he whines that Bajorians are tired of sympathy and promises. The subtext is we're all supposed to accept this obnoxious behavior because we OWE the Bajorians.  We LET THEM DOWN.  How precisely, the Federation did this is skipped over.  The TNG writers only give us one side.  

They leave out the obvious comeback that the Universe is a big place  with lots of victims and the Federation can't help everyone, and there's no logical reason why Group X being oppressed by say the Romulans is less worthy of Federation help then the Bajorians. Further, The Federation doesn't exist to run around the Universe helping Non-Federation peoples.  And what did Bajor ever do for the Federation? And who did they ever help?  All the moral obligation goes one-way.

Again, does this remind you of some real-life 21st Century attitudes?  It should.

The Strong woman Trope

Ro basically acts like a man with Tits.  She's aggressive, obnoxious, curt, and insubordinate. Despite her record of disobeying orders and getting 7 people killed, Picard just thinks she wonderful and offers her a job on the Enterprise!  We're supposed to accept all this because she's a STRONG Women.  And we are supposed to like that because uh... its something we're supposed to like.  Except I didn't.  I like my strong women to be believable WOMEN. And not fakes.

Summary:  Another over-rated TNG episode due to politics.  The amazing thing is TNG fans LOVE Ensign Ro.  I was astounded the writers created a character who killed 7 fellow crewmembers by arrogantly disobeying orders, and we're supposed to feel sorry FOR HER.  

Not only that, but instead of being humbled by her deadly error in judgment, she's cocky and arrogant!  She agrees to stay with Star Fleet because "Starfleet has a lot to learn from me",  y'mean like how to disobey orders, get 7 people killed, but somehow not get courtmaritaled but praised for not doing much of anything? That really is a strong woman.

Retreat, Hell (1952)

Plot:  We follow the exploits of US Marine Battalion in the Korean War, from the landing at Inchon, to the advance into North Korea, and then the famous fighting withdrawl back from Chosin. 

Stars:  Frank Lovejoy, Richard Carlson, Russ Tamblyn

Routine, well-acted, short (95 minute) B&W war movie celebrating the heroism  and professionalism of the Marines.  Its solid but unspectactular.  There isn't a lot of flag-waving or anti-communist rhetoric.  In fact the issues surrounding the war are only lightly touched on.  The enemy are shown to be tough and devious.  

Its too bad this is the only film which details the 1950 epic retreat through rough mountainious terrain in cold bitter weather, fighting through Chinese blocking forces.    It was one of the Marine Corps finest hours.

Summary:  If you're interested in the War movies, the Korean war or Marine Corps history, its worth a look.   

Invasion of the body Snatchers (1978)

Stars: Donald Sutherland, Jeffrey Goldblum, Leonard Nimoy, Brooke Adams
Plot: Remake of 1950s classic. When strange seeds drift to earth from space, mysterious pods begin to grow and invade San Francisco, replicating the city's residents one body at a time.

Movie Structure
Act I - 40 minutes - Brooke Adams feels her husband isn't the "real Geoffrey" and that people are changing. Sutherland and Nimoy (Kibner the pyschiatrist) tell her otherwise.
Act II - 40 minutes - Goldblum and Sutherland find half-formed pod persons and they try to convince Nimoy, and the SF Mayor that Pods are taking over.
Act III - 35 minutes - Realizing that the police and almost everyone else is a Pod, Sutherland and Adams try to leave SF. They try to fight off the Pods before the end.

What Pauline Kael Thought
She loved it, declaring the movie "more sheer fun than any movie since Jaws or Carrie". She was "laughng and scared" even before the titles came on.  It was the American "Movie of the Year" an instant "SF Classic".  And she ended her review:  "It may be the best movie of its kind ever made."

Per Kael: 

• Script has some of the funniest lines ever heard on the screen. 
• Characters - believable and likable. 
• Brooke Adams was Strong and resilient with a "Loopy sense of humor" and an "odd attractiveness"  while Goldblum "ignores his handsomness and delivers his own goofy timing".
• Special effects were amazing.  Score  = Dazzling. 

Funniest Dialogue:

Goldblum: His ideas are garbage. His books are Garbage.
Woman: How can you say that about a man like Kibner.
Goldblum: Not a man like Kibner. I'm saying it about Kibner. He dashes a book off every six months.
Takes me six months to write one line.
Woman: Why?
Goldblum: 'Cos I pick each word individually.

What I thought
Padded, often sluggish, Science Fiction Thriller, that takes a long time to get interesting. While I loved the location shots of 1978 San Francisco, setting the plot in a big city deadened the impact of characters seeing others turn pod. We're further distanced from the action by an obviously bored Donald Sutherland (often looking like drowned rat) and a dull, muted Leonard Nimoy.  We're never really given a reason to care about our "Heroes", and when they turned "Pod Evil" my reaction was "Well, that's interesting".

The chase scene in the '56 version was engaging since we not only liked Kevin McCarthy, he had to get away to warn everyone else. In this version, it seems everyone in San Francisco from the Mayor on down have been turned into Pods. And Sutherland has already warned the Feds. So, he's only saving himself, and frankly, I didn't care that much about him.

Further, the movie, despite being 115 minutes, actually has less plot than the the 56 version. We get too many talky scenes that go nonwhere, too many tensionless chases, and too many people we don't care about. Kael claimed the script was "full of wit", which means we weren't watching the same movie. The films 2nd funniest dialogue relates to a rat turd in someone's soup.

Rewachability Factor:  Low. The movie is incredibly boring the 2nd time round.  Exceptions:  The best scenes (see below) still hold up.  As does the Book party with Goldblum getting off a few funny lines. 

Best Scenes

1. Sutherland goes to sleep and a pod plant sends a shoot up his sleeve. He later wakens with 4 pod people next to him.
2. Sutherland: "How do you know my name. I never told you my name!"
3. Nimoy and Goldblum capture Sutherland and Adams to turn them Pod.

Worst Scene
Sutherland destroys a Pod "factory" ala Rambo with nothing more than a fire ax.

Top Gun Maverick (2022)

The most amazing thing about "Top Gun Maverick" is 60 year old Tom Cruise. He's the most youthful 60 year old I've ever seen, even when you allow for Hollywood "Magic". Is he taking a human growth hormone or anti-aging pills? Or is it just clean living and a deal with the Devil?

Anyway, the movie is enjoyable - if brainless. Lots of Jets. Lots of things that go boom. Lots of "Brass" telling Maverick to shape up or ship out. Lots of Tom on his motorbike and flirting with babes that are way too young for him. Of course, its not as good as the original 

And we get the standard female "kickass" pilots and standard oversupply of black Admirals and authority figures.

But the real problem is this: Why are we watching 60 year old Tom Cruise? Why aren't we watching a 30-40 year old more talented actor? They must exist.

Summary: Good movie for those living in the past or who like action movies with lots of air combat. Best seen in the theater or on the biggest TV screen possible.

Ordinary People (1980)

Plot: The accidental death of the older son of an affluent family deeply strains the relationships among the bitter mother, the good-natured father and the guilt-ridden younger son.

Stars: Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore,  Timothy Hutton

David Denby Take:

American Protestants are apparently the only people on earth who cannot eat and talk at the same time. At least that’s what I’ve learned at such recent movies as The Heartbreak Kid, Annie Hall, Interiors, and the new Ordinary People, all of which have featured a scene in which the Wasps sit down to dinner only to discover that they cannot have a conversation. The Ghastly Wasp Eating Scene is an atonal chamber symphony of missed connections and non sequiturs, trailing off into a terrible silence. Of course, the hapless conversations are meant to be symptomatic of a greater malaise—the atrophy of heart and soul. Our popular culture is fixated on the notion that Wasps can’t laugh or feel.

Ordinary People, the first film directed by Robert Redford, is the most explicit version of this dubious thesis ever put on film.

My Opinon

Well acted, if somewhat  unconvincing, family drama remarkable for (1) winning an Oscar and (2) having MTM play against type as a chillingly repressed character.  Playing Timonthy Hutton's mother,  "Beth", MTM is the villain of the piece as she seems uncaring toward her son recovering from a suicide attempt.  She's the most interesting character in the film but unfortunately MTM is a supporting character.  The film constantly cuts away from her,  to focus in on Huttons' less interesting interactions with his HS friends, swim coach, Girlfriend, and Karen - who also attempted suicide. Even worse, we get 20 minutes of Hutton with his Jewish Psychiatrist, getting him to "Feel" and face his guilt. 

Sutherland adds little as MTM husband due to his usual dullness and odd looks. However, the film did keep me interested when core family relationship was in the spotlight.  Which was about 50 minutes out of 120.

More on Beth

Not only does the film need more "Beth Time" we  never get a sense of her as a real character.  Instead of being a real-live rounded person, who's perhaps still in shock/grief from the death of her oldest son, and her younger son's suicide attempt, we're presented with a cold-hearted woman, a "WASP witch" (Pauline Kael), who only cares for appearances. And can't love.  

Further, the film doesn't really give her side of the story. And nothing she does justifies Sutherland more or less telling her off and reading  her out the family. 

Summary:  More "After-school special" than Ingmar Bergman,  Ordinary People plays to the mass audience. Well acted, but we ge too much about Timonthy Hutton and his HS friends and not enough on the inner-family backstory and dynamics.  The dull Jewish Pyschiatrist drags down the movie even more.  Too bad, because MTM gives an excellent performance. 

.

Pennies From Heaven (1981)

Plot: A Depression-era sheet-music salesman and his innocent schoolteacher mistress try to escape their dreary lives through popular music .
Stars: Bernadette Peters, Christopher Walken, Steve Martin.

What did Pauline Kael Think?   She wrote one of her border-line hysterical "this is so great" reviews. Sample?  “ Pennies from Heaven is the most emotional movie musical I’ve ever seen. It’s a stylized mythology of the Depression which uses the popular songs of the period as expressions of people’s deepest longings—for sex, for romance, for money, for a high good time. There’s something new going on—something thrilling—when the characters in a musical are archetypes yet are intensely alive…. Steve Martin … gives an almost incredibly controlled performance, and Bernadette Peters is mysteriously right in every nuance. 

What Did I think? This movie should be shelved under "What were they thinking?". It was madness  to take a dark 7.5 hour  BBC TV series and then:

• transfer it to an American setting
• compress it down to 98 minutes. and 
• replace Hoskins and Campbell with steve Martin and Bernadette Peters

1) In the series, each 72  minute episode had perhaps 12 minutes of lip-synched music.  The other 60 minutes were dramatic. As a result the device (or gimmick) added to drama, it didn't dominate it. But by using 20 minutes of lip-synching in a 98 minute movie, the gimmick becomes overbearing.  Before too long, I stopped being amused and become annoyed and bored.  And why lip-synch Peters and Martin?  They can sing.

2) By compressing the "Book" from 6 hours to 75 minutes, you lose the characters and turn the story from "dark" to miserable and sleezy.  And by transfereing it to the USA you lose all the context that made the story bearable.

3) And Steve Martin is not a great actor - he's a comedian.  For some reason, he often looks unattracive in the movie.  And, you cant take him seriously.  You watch him and Peters and think, "Why aren't they being funny?".   

In old Hollywood, they wouldn've junked the dark story and written a cheerful musical with some comedy.  But new Hollywood didn't.  And they bombed.

Summary:  There are a couple great song and dance numbers.  Watch those, skip everything else.  

Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade (1989)

I was never the greatest Indiana Jones fan. But the first two films were often fresh, funny, and exciting, and which is more than I say for Last Crusade. A lazy rehash of the first film, we once again have Harrison Ford battling Nazis for possession of a religious artifact with mysterious powers. In this case, its the "Holy Grail" of all things.

Another negative (surprisingly) is Sean Connery. I seem to be alone in thinking he's miscast and his character a drag. One problem? He and Harrison Ford don't make a good pair. I didn't believe them as father and son, and while they talk/bicker, they don't generate any energy - comic or otherwise.  Connery was too subdued and monotone. Imagine, someone with more charisma, like George C. Scott, or Heston in the role!

And then there are the fights, chases, and stunts which not only seem familiar they lack the energy and brilliance of the first two films.Near the end, I had to struggle to stay engaged. The entire tank chase was tedious in the extreme.

Funniest Moment: Hitler mistakes Indy for a fan, and signs his book, instead of arresting him.

Summary:  See the first two Raiders films.  Skip this one. 

Succession - Season Two

Highly praised HBO TV show. I was hoping this was a comedy show, but it seems to be a Dramedy. Which I am completely uninterested in. Because I don't care about Rich people running a "Mega Media" Corporation. I also found the constant profanity (a HBO specialty) and the endless "slow talking" annoying.

But I can see why others like it. Its well acted and well written. I just don't care about the characters.

Heist (2004)

Plot: The title says it all. Gene Hackman is the thief, Danny Devito is the fence. Together they have a plan to steal Swiss Gold. Complications and Double-crosses ensue.

Best Dialogue:   

-Don't you want to hear my last words?

-I Just Did. 

As a heist movie, this one is in the middle of the pack. Despite numerous twists and turns, we never doubt for a second that Old Pro Gene Hackman will come out on top. Further, neither the Heists nor the action scenes are paticularly remarkable or memorable. There's a distinct lack of tension. Mostly, I was going "Well, that was clever" or "Wonder how Gene's gonna get outta this one". In other words, a celebral exercise.

And while the supporting cast is full of good actors, almost none were particularly likable or impressive. They weren't bad,  just OK. The only exceptions were (1) De Vito, who is suprisingly good as the untrustworthy Mob boss/fence and (2) Ricky Jay who's suprisingly bad as a tough guy.  And Rebbeca Pidgeon and Hackman should have been Father/Daughter not Husband/Wife.

Summary: A definite cut below "The Score".  But much better than Warren Beatty's Dollars.  Almost all Serious caper movies are nothing more than Entertainment Product.  But the best have something extra: a touch  of wit,  memorable characters, breathtaking action or enthralling suspense.  Heist doesn't have any of that.  Its well made, but souless and mechanical.  Note: I fast-forwarded though 5-10 minutes that were predictable. 

American Buffalo (1996)

Plot: Three inner-city losers want to rob a valuable coin from a seedy second-hand junk shop.

Despite co-starring one of my favorite actors, Dennis Franz, this is a dull dog of a movie. A filmed Mamet play with two other actors: Dustin Hoffman and Sean Nelson. I can see why this was an award winning play. But as a movie, its a complete bore. Filmed in one room, its non-stop yakky yak. And its just the kind of story I hate.

Typical Dialogue:

Teach: We're talking about money for Christ's sake, we're talking about cards. Friendship is friendship and a wonderful thing and I'm all for it. I never said different, and you know me on this thing, but let's just keep it separate, OK? Let's keep the two apart and we can deal with each other like some human beings.

Spartan (2004)

Have you ever seen a movie because your friend recommended it? And then thought it was horrible? You feel guilty for not liking it. And you want to whitewash your review, because you respect the guy who said it was great.

Anyway, I wont do that with Spartan. Yes, I can understand why some people would love it. But I thought it was pretty mediocre. Kilmer is robotic. And his two subordinates (a black guy, and a kickass Female Sargent) were borderline adequate. Even that would be acceptable, except the film gave me no reason to care about anyone. Cardboard good guys, Cartoonish villainous Arabs, a slutty President's daughter, and devious corrupt Politicans. Adding little to the movie was the pretentious, "hardass" Mamet dialogue. And the usual fake, movieland twists. Mamet should stick to conmen, and stay away from action heroes. 

I guess some people can overlook that and find things to love. I didn't.

All Quiet on the Western Front (2022)

 First, let me say this is an amazingly realistic, well directed and well-acted war movie. Or should I say, "anti-war Movie".  Unlike the fake  "isn't war exciting" 1917, or the "rah, rah, lets kill those Krauts" Saving Private Ryan,  this is a much more accurate and ADULT view of war.  And I wish I'd seen it in the theater.  

Having said that, the movie lacks what the 1929 version had in spades: Heart.  We're always one step removed from the characters.   The 1929 version  made us deeply care about the characters.  This one really doesn't.  Another problem? It probably has a greater impact on young folks.  I've seen a ton of anti-war movies, so the message didn't really reasonate with me.

Bottom line:  I respect the film. It incredibly well-made.  But it didn't hit me emotionally. 

Five By Chabrol

Betty (1992) A drunken self-destructive woman tells the story of her bourgeois promiscuous life and her unhappy marriage.

Inspector Lavardin (1986) - Inspector Lavardin is induced to investigate the murder of a province's notable who was taking himself as the moral guardian of his village.

L'enfer (1994) - Paul and Nelly have everything to be happy: a dream wedding and a hotel. Until Paul starts to doubt Nelly.

Madame Bovary (1991) - Based on the famous  Flaubert Novel
Poulet Au Vinaigre (1985) - When a small town of Normandy begins losing its citizenry in a series of strange deaths, out-of-town police inspector Jean Lavardin is sent to investigate

Based on IMDB,  Director Claude Chabrol made a lot of films - and quite a few good ones. But these five, included in a new Blue-ray box set, bored me. The stories were either mundane or sleezy.  

I watch films to enjoy myself. Give me action, adventure, thrills, chills and spills. Make me laugh, sing or dance, warm my heart. Or give me someone I can root for, or some great acting, direction, or writing.

I have little interest in watching average movies about bland or unlikable people.  I don't care that Madame Bovary is bored. Or that dull people in Normandy or some french village are getting murdered.  Or that someone has an unhappy marriage.  Or the life of an alcoholic. 

Hopefully, I'll find see some better Chabrol movies.

Saturday Fiction

 Supposedly a "Tense, pounding, historical Thriller" with Gong Li  in Shanghai circa December 1941. Playing a famous actress on a secret mssion,  We wonder what her motives are, and who is to be trusted.  Filmed in B&W.  Maybe I was in the wrong mood, but  it seemed sorta meh to me.  Maybe its better in Chinese. 

Beatles Get back - Documentary

 Incredibly long documentary about The Beatles last live concert and their making of  the Abbey Road and Let it Be. Lots of singing.  Lots of "Hey, why don't we try this?" and  chit chat. Seems that the FAB 4, didn't just do drugs, they smoked a ton of cigarettes.  Shows in realtime that Paul was really the driving force behind the Band. Every group needs a leader, and Paul led the Beatles. Its no accident, he had the longest and most successful solo career.  It should be  obvious,  but this is for Beatles fans only. 

Pandas (2018) - Documentary

 42 minute documentary about "Qian Qian" who is born in captivity but destined for life in the scenic Sichuan mountains of China.  

There are nice shots of the Sichuan mountains.  And some very cute shots of the Pandas.  But the story really isn't that great, and we needed more Panda.  OK for what it is. Probably better in an IMAX theater full of people laughing at those lovable bears.  

The Northsman

Too dark. Too much Mud. Too much blood. No doubt a realistic look for Vikings back in 1000 AD or whenever, but I didn't care who became King of their muddy streets and dirty wood huts.

Sorry, I like my historical adventure films to be inspiring, unrealistic and romantic. Give me Kirk Douglas and some rousing clean-cut Vikings any day of the week. Plus, I need someone to root for.

Yellowstone TV series - Season 1

 Stars Kevin Costner and its fairly popular.  I wasn't impressed. For some reason thought it was a Western.  Y'know six-guns and horses.  A Western western.  But its not.  Its about rich ranchers in  Wyoming.  Too contempory and too soap opera for my tastes. 

White Lotus - Season 1

 Above average HBO TV comedy about a group of rich people visiting an expensive Hawaiian resort.  Place is not named, but I'd guess Maui.  It was mixture of good and bad:

The Good

Jennifer Coolidge and Murray Bartlett are the comic standouts.  Both are "Alcoholic Lunatics" but we take a while to peel back the layers on "Armond" to find that out.

The other adults are amusing but not consistently so.  Steve Lacy as "Shane" becomes more funny as his feud with Armond becomes more and more involved.  Steve Zahn and Connie Britton as "The Mossbachers" also get better, although Mark's discovery of his Father's double life was laugh out loud hilarious.

The Bad

First, in order to pad out the series, or to appeal to the "Youth Demographic", we get far too focus on the 3 teenagers.  Quinn Mossbacher is a bore, and the same is true of the daughter and her friend.  It didn't take long for me to FF through every scene with these characters, unless they were involved with the older adults.

Second,  we get the typical HBO leftwing,  NPR/Hipster degeneracy and politics. Lots of explicit sex (this time Gay ass kissing),  swearing,  and drug use.  Which we're all supposed to be tittilated or think its funny. Also, lots of talk about "Colonialism" and "White Privilage".  The rich guests are all white and WASPy (not a Jew, Asian, or Indian in sight). The staff are all put-upon  blacks, Polynesians, and Gays.  I'll give the Producers points for making crazy Tanya a BLM supporter while Mrs. Mossbacher loves Hillary Clinton. 

Summary: A mixed bag, but overall enjoyable. Compared to most USA television, this is pretty good. I look forward to Season 2.  But will have my FF in hand. 

West Side Story (2021)

I had mixed feelings about the original West Side Story. So, I was hoping Speilberg would fix the flaws and improve it. And... he didn't. In fact, Speilberg hews so closely to the original movie in terms of story and song, you wonder why he bothered. Even the movie's run-times: 153 minutes v. 156 minutes are similar. And why remake the story and keep it in the 1950s?

On the plus side: the actors fit their parts better, we hear the Puerto Ricans speak Spanish, the setting and dialogue is more realistic, and the minor actors are better cast. Thank God, the cornball Jewish store owner got replaced! And since its Speilberg directing, the action scenes are more exciting and less phony.

But that's about it. The dancing isn't better, its usually worse. Songs? No significant improvement. "Cool" and "The Jet Song" , my two favorites from the original, were much worse. The love story between Maria and Tony which seemed fake and sugary in the 1961 original is still fake and sugary..

Summary:   An uneccessary remake that neither improves the original nor significantly updates it.  And who was supposed to be the target audience - Hispanics who like Lenny Bernstein?  Its puzzling. Anyway, if you want to see one West Side Story movie, this isn't it.  See the '61 version.

Who'll stop the Rain (1979)

Plot: A merchant seaman helps an old army friend smuggle Heroin into the USA. But the drug deal goes bad, and he and his friend's wife end-up running for their lives.

Starring:  Tuesday Weld, Nick Nolte, Michael Moriarity

Athough a critical favorite when released,  Who'll stopped the Rain has been completely forgotten.  And I can see why.  Skillfully directed, with good performances by Tuesday Weld, Nick Nolte, and Michael Moriarity,  it should be a lot more engaging and enjoyable than it it. The problem (as always) is the script and plot.

The movie gives us a standard story we've seen a million times.  A little band of not-so-bad crooks are being chased by a bigger band of very-bad crooks.  The big crooks want what the little crooks have, in this case 2 Kilo's of Heroin. Along the way, we get torture scenes, chase scenes, double crosses, and a shootout.  And because its the 70s, we get a downbeat ending with a dead leading man.  The dialogue is servicable.

It has its good points,  For one, a memorable scene where Nolte first meets Weld, discovers he's being followed and beats up the bad guys.  Another? there's a final shootout that's both unbelievable and exciting.  And 1970s California is a welcome sight. But the characters are all surface, there's no reason to root for them, and the villains are surprising flat.  Its way too long at 126 minutes 

Summary: An average Crook-chase movie with some good acting and a few good scenes.  

Postscript - The Stanley Kauffmann Review.

Kauffmann includes this in his book "Before My Eyes" and in his concise, well-written way, writes a puzzling review full of hate for the movie, the actors, and co-screenwriter Robert Stone.  After spending one page discussing Director Karel Reisz, and calling him English (!), he spends 1/2 page on the movie.  Kauffmann starts by trashing the source novel: National Book Award winner "Dog Soldiers", calling it vacuous, tedious, and a 2nd rate Hemingway knockoff.  Kauffmann then declares the movie characters are "vermin" & attacks the movie for falsely trying to portray them as "decent".  Other films about "Sewer People" - thunders Stanley - have the morals to "close the manhole cover".  He closes with darts at the 3 actors.  Nolte is compared to Buster Crabbe, Moriarity is labeled arrogant and condesending, and Weld is dismissed as a one-note "anguished Kewpie-doll". 

One wonders where all this moralism comes from.  After all, Kauffmann loved Bonnie and Clyde, Charlie Varrick, The Getaway, and Chinatown.  It confirms how "unreliable" Kauffmann is as a film reviewer.  What he likes today, he'll dislike tommorrow.  Why? Not clear. Motivations not shown on the page. 

DIck Van Dyke Show - Season One - Part III

Forty-four tickets **
One angry man **
Harrison B. Harding **

Standard filler episodes but with an extra something that makes them re-watchable. One Angry Man is the standard sitcom plot: “lead character holds out for Not guilty” I’d rate it higher, but the guest actors are terrible. Were they Carl Reiner’s neighbors? 44 Tickets – is the standard “Lead Character promised people tickets but doesn’t have them” trope. This one must go back to radio and Jack Benny. The only thing keeping it two stars? The always delightful Eleanor Audley shows up as the snooty “Mrs. Billingsley”. Harrison B. Harding – has some good writing, but the story’s a one-note piece of fluff. I would have rated it higher with a better guest star. Instead, it’s no more than adequate with 2nd banana Allen Melvin

To Tell or Not to Tell ** 1/2
Empress Carlotta's Necklace ** 1/2

MTM makes both these episodes above average. She dances in To tell or not to Tell. And her chemistry with Van Dyke in the final heartwarming scene was truly charming. In Carlotta’s Necklace her attempts to disguise her dislike of the necklace were hilarious. The episode also has some clever writing, whereby all of Laura's subtle but critical comments are taken by Van Dyke as proof she loves the necklace. The only keeping it from being 3 stars are the two terrible guest actors as Rob’s parents. 

My Blonde haired Brunette ***
Where did I come from? ***

Two good episodes that are memorable due to the two stars. MTM takes the standard “Wife dyes her hair with disastrous results” and makes it funny with over-the-top emotions, while Van dyke’s physical comedy lifts the usually boring “Dad acts crazy when his wife;s about to give birth”. Van Dyke sleeping with his hat on, to save time, is a highlight.

Oh, how we met the night that we danced ***
The great story of how Rob and Laura met while he was on in the Army. Best thing? MTM and Van Dyke sing/dance “You. Wonderful You”. I deducted ½ a star for the annoying Marty Ingels as “Sol” – Rob’s army friend. There’s way too much of this character, but Van Dyke and MTM save it.

Curious thing about women***1/2
The best episode of season one. Plot: Laura’s been opening Rob’s mail before he sees it. Annoyed,  Rob teaches her a lesson. Again, this is another old sitcom plot made fresh and funny by the two stars. MTM’s physical comedy as she tries to keep her curiosity in check and NOT open the package was great. The ending was stolen from Fibber McGee and Molly. But who knows who they stole it from. 

My only complaint? As in other episodes, Reiner  has Rob get self-righteous and obsessive about minor things. Here, Rob, is far too upset about Laura opening her mail, and complains too much.

DIck Van Dyke Season One - Part II

Meershtatz pipe*
Unwelcome Houseguest*
Talented Neighborhood*
Jealousy*

These are all forgettable, unfunny episodes with generic sitcom plots. The “Pipe” is a lowlight, with Rob being upset that Buddy got a pipe from Alan Brady and he didn’t. Childish-Silly-Not funny. In Unwelcome Houseguest Richie is incredibly annoying. He’s afraid of the dog, and thinks it’s a wolf. The writers were from NYC - and it shows.  Talented neighbor is full of annoying kids trying to get into showbiz. Jealousy is a badly executed MTM star turn episode. Laura is upset at Rob working “closely” with a movie star. Given MTM’s talents even this standard trope could have been good, except she’s given little to do. and the writing is paint-by-the-numbers.  It doesn't  help that MTM looks more like a movie star then the guest star.  

The Bad Old Days*

Plot?  Rob is upset when Richie calls him “Rob”, and Laura forces him to do household chores while giving him Cold cuts for dinner. Annoyed, Rob yearns for the “Good ol’ days” when fathers ruled the roost. 

Left-wing SJW’s cry over the episode’s “sexism”, so I was looking forward to it, and assumed  the low IMDB rating was politically driven.  Wrong.  It’s badly written and notable for the lack of good jokes. In fact there are few jokes of any kind! The best one?  Jerry asks Rob “Where’s your purse?” after seeing Rob wearing Laura’s apron.  That’s how bad it is. 

And we get a repetitive, slow-moving, 7 minute dream sequence, where 1890s Rob orders an overworked Laura around and Richie works in factory.   Seriously, this is the worst thing I've seen on the show.  I wasn't offended.  I just sat there and wondered how Reiner thought this was interesting or funny.  There's little physical comedy. And our characters don't react in a surrealist, goofy funny manner, as you'd expect from a comedy dream. 

The show ends with just woken Rob spouting off about how “These are the good ol’ days” and husbands should “treat their wives as equals and not like feudal kings”. 

The SJW’s get it exactly backwards.  The problem with the episode isn’t “sexism” - it’s that the show is an unfunny attack on “sexism”.  Reiner wanted to knockdown a straw-man labeled the “Good ol’ Days when Men were men” Maybe he saw “Life with Father” & thought that was reality.  It’s a strange idea for a sitcom. Anyway, this was his argument for 1960s liberalism and equality between the sexes.  Nothing wrong with that, he just forgot the jokes. 

Buddy can you spare a Job **
Boarder Incident **
Who owes who what? **

Standard sitcom stories with Buddy, made watchable by good execution. In Boarder Incident, while Pickles is away, Buddy moves in with the Petrie’s and annoys the hell out of them. Buddy, can you spare a job, has Buddy quitting the Brady show and then trying to get his job back. Notable for how real Mel’s dislike of Buddy is. Obnoxious, unlikable Lennie Weinrib shows up and is very unlikable and  obnoxious. Who owes who what? Has an even more generic plot, Buddy owes Rob $25 and Rob tries to remind him of it. In this one, in fact all three shows, I often predicted what was going to happen next and and even the punch-lines. Not a good sign. 

Dick Van Dyke Show Season One - Part I

Sally is a Girl*
Where have you been Fassbinder? *
Sally and Lab Technician*

These are all “Poor Sally is having a doomed love affair” episodes. When it was time for a Rose Marie “star turn”, it’s too bad the writers didn’t give her different and better storylines.

I am my brother’s keeper*
The sleeping brother*

Both episodes highlight Jerry Van Dyke - cast as Rob’s brother Stacy. Nothing in either episode makes up for the fact that I don’t like Jerry Van Dyke.

Washington vs. The Bunny*
Laura and Rob fight over Rob missing Richie’s play for business reasons. A padded, low energy episode - notable for several things. First, we get Six dull minutes of Jesse white and van dyke sitting in an airplane talking, setting up and wrapping up the situation. Secondly, a funny 3 minute dream sequence with Rob being controlled by Puppet-master Laura. Third, an excellent, heartfelt, two minute ending between Laura and Rob. There’s a good five minutes – but the rest is filler, especially the Jesse White sequence.

Father of the Week*
A word a Day*

Dick Van Dyke plays “Sitcom dad” in these two boring episodes. “A word a Day” has Richie in trouble for saying a bad word. Low on laughs, long on angst. People assert Liberal Carl Reiner was cleverly subverting strictures against Foul language, but so what? It’s still boring. In “father of the week” Van Dyke gets in front of Richie’s firt grade class and explains his job. That’s five funny minutes out of 25. It should be recognized that Larry Matthews was only 6 years old in Season one, and he's cute. But that's a low bar. Find a six-year old who's not cute. 

Sick Boy and the Sitter*
This was the first episode produced. Standard sitcom plot: Laura is an overly –protective mother who imagines Richie is sick and doesn’t want to go to the party,. Very bland. No Alan Brady, no Millie or Jerry. Few laughs. The only excitement ? A six minute performance by Sally, Buddy, and Rob. Sally sings, Buddy tells jokes and plays his Cello, Rob does physical comedy. MTM just watches.

The twizzle*
Quite rightly considered one of the worst episodes. The goal didn't seem to be laughs, but showcasing the guest star, Broadway singer Jerry Lanning. Who was Mr. Lanning? Well, he was a sort of Tab Hunter/Elvis Presley knockoff. He sings for almost six minutes and is the center of the attention for the rest. The songs and singing are unremarkable. Too bad we didn’t get six minutes of Van Dyke and MTM singing. Did the Executive Producer have Lanning under contract?

Sol and the Sponsor*

Punch thy Neighbor*

Standard Sitcom plots +  bad guest starts  = tedium.  In Sol and the Sponsor – vulgar Army buddy Sol drops in to visit Rob and spoils an important dinner.  Reiner assumes we’ll  root for

good ol' Sol, except Sol’s not funny - he’s obnoxious.  Even worse, he’s played by terminally annoying and cartoonish Marty Ingels.  Punch they Neighbor is a Jerry episode.  Here, Jerry mercilessly kids Rob about his bad TV show. There’s far too much unfunny “Kidding”, and Jerry Paris doesn’t improve the material. Jerry Helper comes off as a complete jerk and his friendship with Rob (as usual) seems unconvincing.  These two have zero “Bromance” chemistry. 

Dick Van Dyke Show Season 1 - Rankings

 Very Good ***1/2

1. The Curious thing about women

Good ***

1. Oh, how we met the night that we danced
2. My Blonde haired Brunette

Above Average ** 1/2

1. To Tell or Not to Tell
2. Empress Carlotta's Necklace

Watchable Filler **

1. Buddy can you spare a Job
2. Boarder Incident
3. Forty-four tickets
4. Harrison B. Harding
5. One angry man
6. Return of Happy Spangler
7. Who owes who what?

Below Average (Skip) *

1. Bad ol' Days
2. Father of the Week
3. I am my brothers keeper
4. Jealousy
5. Meershtatz pipe
6. Punch thy Neighbor
7. Sally is a Girl
8. Sally and Lab Technician
9. the sleeping brother
10. Sick Boy and the Sitter
11. Sol and the Sponsor
12. Talented Neighborhood
13. The twizzle
14. Unwelcome Houseguest
15. Washingon vs. The Bunny
16. Where have you been Fassbinder?
17. A word a Day

Dick Van Dyke show Season 4 - Rankings

Very Good  ***1/2

1. My Mother Can Beat Up My Father
2. Baby Fat 

Good ***

1. One Hundred Terrible Hours 
2. Never Bathe on Saturday
3. Three Letters from One Wife
4. Pink Pills and Purple Parents 

Above Average ** 1/2

1. Alan Brady Show Goes to Jail
2. Br-room Br-room
3. Bupkis  
4. Death of the Party 
5. Ghost of A. Chantz
6. There's No Sale Like Wholesale 

Watchable Filler  **

1. 4 1/2
2. The Impractical Joke
3. It Wouldn't Hurt Them to Give Us a Raise
4. My Two showoffs and Me
5. The Redcoats
6. Stretch Petrie vs. Kid Schnek

Below Average (Skip)  *

1. A Vigilante Ripped My Sports Coat.
2. Anothy Stone
3. Boy No. 1 and Boy No. 2
4. Brother, can you spare $2,500
5. The Case of the Pillow
6. Girls will Be Boys 
7. Lady and the Babysitter
8. The Man from Emperor
9. Show of Hands 
10. Stacy Petrie Part I
11. Stacy Petrie Part II
12. Romance, Roses and Rye Bread
13. Your Home Sweet Home is my Home
14. Young man with a Shoehorn

Dick Van Dyke Show Season 4 - Part V

One Hundred Terrible Hours - ***
Rob recalls the time he broke the record as a sleepless disc-jockey  and then met Alan Brady.

This is one of those Dick Van Dyke Show episodes that doesn't have that many jokes,  but is still memorable, due to the situation and talent of the two leads.  Being a sleep-deprived DJ allows Van Dyke to engage in mucho funny physical comedy.  

Show of Hands  *
Rob and Laura have to go to an inter-racial awards show with gloves on, since their hands have been accidently dyed black.

Oy vey! I don't know what's worse:

• The boring setup
• Laura/Rob stupidly getting  black dye on the hands;
• Laura/Rob stupidly failing to get the black dye off their hands; 
• Trying to hide their "black hands" from the inter-racial audience;  or
• Rob trivalizing racial differences in a long-winded SERIOUS speech.  

Wait, its ALL bad. This dated episode manages to be offensive AND boring.  Don't blame MTM and Van Dyke for this mess. Blame Carl Reiner. 

Never Bathe on Saturday ***
While on their second honeymoon, Laura gets her toe stuck in a hotel bathtub faucet and Rob can't get through the locked bathroom door to free her.

One of  the shows highest rated episodes. (IMDB ranks it number 10).  I enjoyed it, but could have done without the constant setups/flashbacks  "And so, Rob did...."  Like "100 terrible hours"  this one relies on the situation and MTM's comedic timing and Van Dyke's physical ability for most of the laughs. 

Baby Fat ***1/2

Alan Brady wants Rob to secretly add jokes and "improve" a script by famous Broadway playwright Harper Worthington Yates (Tennesse Williams) 

Highlight:  Richard Erdman (Hoffy from Stalag 17) shows up a Broadway dress designer!

Well-written, fast paced episode.  Excellent performance by Erdman and Strother Martin.  Once again, Reiner proves he can be funny, if he's given good lines, and gets suppport.  And this episode doesn't rely solely on Van Dyke and MTM's charm and physical comedy, but gives them funny lines too.  This is one of the better scripts. 

Br-room Br-room  **1/2

Rob buys a motorcyle over Laura's objections. 

Hightlight:  Rob gets on his motorcycle and  childishly pretends to be riding. 

This one is a tough one to rate. Van Dyke is quite good at playing a Walter Mitty type character, and MTM is quite good as the wife who doesn't want him to get injured.  There's also a humorous "Roadside cafe" scene where Rob meets a motorcycle gang and  get arrested.  The problem is too much of the episode is just Laura & Rob  having the same argument over and over.  Too much repetition to be rated higher. 

There's no sale like Wholesale ** 1/2

Buddy always claims "I could've gotten it for you wholesale"  so he helps Rob to buy Laura a fur coat for a  discount. 

Better than expected.  My heart sank when I read the story outline, Oh God another Buddy episode.  But the writing on this one is quite good, and Buddy is also good, since he has good line, and a relatively small part.  The only negative is the use of Italian furriers.  1960s NYC fur dealers were primarily Jewish, and if there were any Italians, that fact was kept well hidden.  Why label the shady characters as Italian?  The Show never shied from casting explicitly Jewish characters.