Some thoughts on one movie rating...

I haven't seen the new "Winnie the Pooh" movie. However, I do have a question about its rating. According to Jay Leno's Headlines, and also seen in this link to a movie review, "Winnie the Pooh" is rated G for "(violence, profanity)." This begs the questions:

1. Exactly how much violence and profanity can a G-rated movie have?

2. Isn't it really rated G for everything? Obviously not "Winnie the Pooh," but, if a movie only has G-rated violence and profanity and several shots of full-frontal nudity, it's rated R for the nudity. (Then again, Winnie the Pooh doesn't wear pants, and I don't think Tigger or Eeyore wear anything.)

3. Exactly how much violence and profanity has there ever been in "Winnie the Pooh?" Is somebody misunderstanding words like "Pooh" and "heffalump?"

(OK, I know I'm making way too much out of what's almost certainly an editing mistake, but the idea of a movie rated G for violence and profanity still amuses me.)

Ramdom thoughts on the Atlas movie...

Usually, I'm not too particular about when I see movies that I want to see. Often, as long as I see it on the big screen, whenever will be fine. The movie "Atlas Shrugged, Part 1" is different--knowing how much stock Hollywood puts into opening weekend returns, I want to see the movie this weekend; I'd have seen it opening night if the mall weren't a madhouse on the weekends. Ever since I heard about it, it's been at the top of my list for upcoming movies.

What I'm trying to figure out is why I want to see the movie so badly when I've already read and reread the book. For movies where I haven't read the book, the movie is a quick and easy way to experience the story. However, my enthusiasm in this case seems more difficult to explain.

I suppose it's possible that it's a quick way to experience the book again. As with the books where the movie is the quick way to see what's it about for a first time, it could also be a quick way to experience it again.

Somewhat going against that idea, though, it occurs to me that seeing the movie is a way to see the book as others envision it and get new perspective on it.

A third idea is that the simple idea that a good novel would represent a solid start on the way to making a good movie. This one may apply a bit less to the "Atlas Shrugged" movie than most cases--the movie was made by an entrepreneur who has never produced a movie before, the director has little experience, and I've never heard of most of the stars, and the budget is small by Hollywood standards. So, while I like the actress who's playing Dagny, I have some apprehensions about how the movie will come out.

I think the main reason I'm looking forward to the movie so much, however, is that it's a way to celebrate the book. It's a way of going out and saying, "this is a great book--pay attention!" One reason why I tend to lean most heavily on this theory is that I've been trying to urge Donald to see the movie--alas, it seems, to no avail. I also tend to think this is the case because I really want to see it opening weekend so it'll have good returns in the way the movie industry seems to care about, and have them despite the limited release.

Regardless, though, I'm glad to finally see that Atlas Shrugged will make it to the big screen.

My old movie review website is closing!

Well, an era of indecision is ending.

Eleven years ago, I started an online movie review service. For about a year and a half, I posted regular movie reviews on the web on GeoCities (free web-hosting--an essential component when no one is paying you), and sent them out in e-mails to subscribers (also free). Then I got a writing job with a magazine in Washington, and subsequently, burnout. The result of that was that since 2000, my website had been in limbo--I never officially closed it, but didn't post any new reviews either.

Yahoo!, for whatever reason, is closing down GeoCities for good. I can only fault Yahoo! for this--it was great to have free web-hosting even if it meant carrying their ads and bandwidth limitations. Corporate greed (there‘s a heavy push for us on GeoCities to move to their very expensive paid hosting--I'm not going to pay), incompetence (blogger.com, YouTube, MySpace, and a zillion other sites prove there‘s still a place for free hosting online), and shortsightedness (there are very few web services with a 15 year history--that alone would be a reason to try to keep it open) are the only explanations I can imagine.

In the meantime, I’m going to officially pull the plug. I plan to redirect the domain name here (another free writing project I don’t tend to as often as I should, but that’s another issue), and copy the content over here (marking it with the tag "ReviewsbyJohn"). That way, I’ll be able to keep the reviews online without having to maintain a new site. However, ReviewsbyJohn as a separate service is no more. I will, however, leave the reviews over there for the benefit of anyone with old links, and so they’ll still be available here, if Yahoo! reconsiders.

And I will miss the film-reel graphic--I made that myself with Windows Paint.

Here’s looking at you, kid.

Missed it by that much

"Get Smart:" *** (out of 5)


Warning: here be spoilers!

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

With the AC on the fritz, my dad and I decided to take in a movie after dinner. We had both wanted to see "Get Smart," and the timing worked well, so that's what we saw.
It has been eight years since I shut down my movie review service. I want to get in the habit of blogging more, so I thought I'd try writing reviews here. This movie is not an easy one to review, either.
"Get Smart" pretty-much takes its cue from the '60s TV show of the same title. Maxwell Smart (played by Steve Carell) is an analyst from Control who desperately wants to become a field agent. When the terrorist organization Kaos attacks Control Headquarters and steals files with the identities of most of the field agents, he gets his chance.
In the end, Carell holds his own as Smart, and the chemistry between Smart and Agent 99 (Anne Hathaway) is very good. The film also does one thing that the original series never did--it explains how the bumbling Max got to be Agent 86 in the first place.
The real problem with the movie is that it never makes it out of the shadow of the original TV series--which was one of the best shows in the history of television. Two prominent gags in the movie--the fly and the beaded curtain--are lifted straight from the television series, and the cone of silence gets an electronic makeover. There are also nods to the original show--an amusing cameo by Bernie Kopell (the original Siegfried), and a Control Museum that figures prominently. With the museum, however, we do, however, come perilously close to suggesting that there's a new Maxwell Smart and Siegfried in the same universe as the old ones.
The movie also contains some iffy elements. At one point, Siegfried--who is described in the film as the leader of Kaos--gets a call from someone who seems to be his superior, but that idea is never developed. (Sequel setup-perhaps? There does seem to be a spin-off DVD in the can already.) There are also sequences in the film where the Chief (Alan Arkin) is inexplicably violent (and not towards Kaos agents). It also stretches credibility that even an agent as bumbling as Maxwell Smart would use a match to remove gum from his shoe while on an airplane. Some muddled "fat acceptance" messages also appear, but still feel out of place.
The movie does take advantage of the new medium--the stunt sequences go beyond what could readily be done for the TV show. For example, the miniature crossbow and flamethrower on Smart's Swiss Army knife are both put to very good effect. There is also one very funny sight gag at the end that simply could not have been on 1960's TV. The movie definitely earns its PG-13 rating.
I enjoyed "Get Smart." The challenge in reviewing it is that I'm having trouble figuring out how much I enjoyed the movie on its own merits, and how much it was simply making me nostalgic for the superior television show.

The Artless War

"The Art of War"
Overall Rating: *


Some people hate action films. "The Art of War," exhibiting every problem the genre is notorious for, provides a clear example why.

"The Art of War" opens in Hong Kong on New Years Eve, 1999. There, Shaw (Wesley Snipes)--a James Bond-like secret agent working for the U.N.--is attending a party on top of a hotel. Unlike the revelers, Shaw is not there to celebrate the "new millennium"--but rather, to spy on a North Korean general. The general has ended peace talks with South Korea, but Shaw promptly finds proof that the general is spying on the U.S, and, additionally, that he is having sex with teenagers. Shaw then uses this information to blackmail the general back into negotiations.

That mission, however, has nothing at all to do with the plotline--at least, what little plot there is. Basically, the movie sticks with the "best and loyalest agent is framed" formula. Predictably, Shaw--though everyone is either out to get him, or at least unwilling to help him--is able to hold his own. Also predictably, you should have suspicions about who the villains' real mastermind is about five seconds after meeting this person. This predictability is only part of the film's unoriginality. Several sequences seem almost stolen straight from "True Lies," "Entrapment," and various James Bond films, only to be awkwardly grafted into "The Art of War." Beyond these recycled elements, there is no plot. Shaw bounces from action sequence to action sequence almost at random. Nobody seems to have examined whether the final cut made sense. For instance, Shaw is able to find Julia (Marie Matiko) because he knows where she's going to be ambushed by the villains--though how he knows where and when to find her remains unknown. Nor does the movie offer any explanation of how Julia knew about an underground sex club; not that the club really matters, other than getting a few more naked women and guns (the latter when the police raid the place) on screen, I couldn't figure out any reason why Shaw and Julia went there. It was around here I decided that logical analysis of this movie was totally futile.

The logical gaps in the plotline might not be as bad, were there any likable characters. Sadly, aside from Julia--who seems to be an innocent victim--most of the characters are odious. Considering how Shaw treats her, I can think of two reasons why she protects Shaw at every opportunity and eventually falls in somewhat in love with him: stupidity, or Stockholm syndrome. Beyond keeping Julia handcuffed at nearly every opportunity, Shaw also beats people up without provocation--and this is the character we're supposed to like. As a general rule, the kindest thing you can say about most of the characters is that some of them are smart enough to be Machiavellian. So much for sympathy.

To give the film some credit, there are some good stunts. The one that comes to mind immediately is a sequence where Shaw manages to save everyone in a diner from a bomb--planted by a nameless villain in an awkward attempt to kill Julia. These well done scenes are few and far between, however.

Generally undermining the stunts is the cinematography. Many shots are underlit. Others are sped up to the point you can't follow them. One really confusing flashback sequence further muddles the picture. There are even a few bizarre camera angles to make sure every possible problem happens.

"The Art of War" is definitely not family fare. It has graphic violence, full frontal nudity and graphic sex scenes, considerable strong language, and on screen drug use. Throwing in that it's bad cinema, you really have everything that parents might want to protect their children from.

Sun Tzu must be turning in his grave--Hollywood stole his title, and stuck it on a really bad action film. As for this "The Art of War," there isn't really a full-fledged war, and there definitely is no trace of art.

Title: "The Art of War"
Release date: August 25, 2000
MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: *
Aprox. run time: 117 min.
Director: Christian Duguay
Writers: Simon Davis Barry, Wayne Beach
Stars: Wesley Snipes, Anne Archer (plays Hooke), Marie Matiko

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/ArtofWar.htm
Added to blog site: 7/26/09

See it--it's the patriotic thing to do.

"The Patriot"
Overall Rating: ****½


As you've probably gathered from my selection of movies and my reaction to them, I'm a fan of action films. Two of my favorite from that genre are "Stargate" and "Independence Day"--both directed by Rolland Emmerich. Shortly after the disappointing "Godzilla," I learned that Emmerich's next project was "The Patriot," a movie based on the life of Francis Marion. The Revolutionary War is an historic period of particular interest to me, so I'd been eagerly awaiting this film for two years. I was not disappointed.

The film opens with Benjamin Martin (Mel Gibson)--who is based extremely loosely on Francis Marion--quietly praying that his past sins will not come back to haunt him. A veteran of the French and Indian War and widower, Martin now wishes to lead a quiet life on his plantation. The events of 1776, however, will not allow this. His life is disrupted when he is called to the South Carolina Assembly to vote on a levy to support the Continental Army. There, he argues that while he believes in American independence, the time isn't right to fight for it. Despite his opposition, the measure passes, and his eldest son Gabriel (Heath Ledger) enlists in the Colonial Army. Two years later, however, Charleston has been captured, and the war is at the doorstep of the Martin plantation.

Many people have attacked "The Patriot" for how it deals with history. Mainly, the complaints are that Francis Marion wasn't really a heroic figure, that "The Patriot" glosses over slavery, and that it exaggerates the British brutality. The criticism about Marion is irrelevant since the movie centers around fictional characters. The other criticisms are not really fair: though the movie deals slightly with the issue of slavery, that's not what it's primarily about, and the worst act of brutality by the British--the only one that could really be called an exaggeration of what the British actually did--is committed by a fictional, rogue officer. This is not to say the movie is perfect in its history. The movie makes two wild gaffes in its history: the British didn't take Charleston until 1780, and the film's climactic battle doesn't correspond to any real battle.

It's strange that while the film makes these big mistakes, they seem to get the details right. "The Patriot" feels like a walk through the streets of Colonial Williamsburg or in Independence Hall. The attention to detail on the sets are only one aspect of the excellent special effects. As exhibited in his previous action films, Emmerich knows how to blow stuff up, and knows how to make it exciting; "The Patriot" does not disappoint on that count.

Where "The Patriot" differs from most action films, however, is in Martin's internal conflict. Martin has a brutal past, and fears his own brutality. His rationalizations about the time not being right for independence and his desire to protect his family are clearly--if subtly--not his main reason for wanting to stay out of the fight. Gibson deserves great credit for making apparent something that his character doesn't state--and may not even fully acknowledge.

"The Patriot" has very little strong language, and no strong sexual content (only an innuendo in one place). The main reason for its R rating is violence: the film has many battle sequences, including one where children fire on British officers. If I'd been rating the film, I might have given it a PG-13, but the film is certainly borderline.

"The Patriot" is easily the best film so far this year. Though it makes some historical errors, the film is an excellent production providing an engrossing story.


Title: "The Patriot"
Release date: June 28, 2000

MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: ****½

Aprox. run time: 164 min.
Director: Rolland Emmerich
Writers: Robert Rodat
Stars: Mel Gibson, Heath Ledger, Jason Isaacs (plays Col. William Tavington)

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Patriot.htm

Added to blog site: 8/3/09

Mission: Implausible

"Mission: Impossible 2"
Overall Rating: ***


I admit it, I find action movies exciting. I do, however, regard the script as more than a mere formality. "Mission: Impossible 2" has some fine stunts, but the script isn't quite all I could hope for. On the plus side, it makes nice use of foreshadowing--the rock-climbing scene at the beginning (used in every preview) won't be the only time IMF agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) climbs a cliff. The movie even has a correct and appropriate classical allusion--Chimera, a Greek mythical monster with a lion's head and serpent's tail, is also the name of a genetically engineered virus made by splicing other viruses together. The best touch is having the scientist who invented the genetically engineered virus run into a group of kids playing "Ring around the Rosie"--a nursery rhyme about the Black Death.

While a talented writer(s) got his/her/their hands on the script at some point, it wasn't enough to save the film completely. We never do get an answer to why one character (Dr. Nekhorvich, played by Rade Sherbedgia) always calls Ethan "Demitri." Nor do we know how only a couple of main characters get sick, despite the fact that the Chimera virus, supposedly as contagious as the flu, was released in downtown Sydney. Aside from the holes, there is also a lack of originality in "Mission: Impossible 2." For instance, as with the previous movie, this movie deals with a rogue IMF agent. The film also has a businessman who lacks a conscience--Hollywood likes to show executives prepared to kill millions for profit, and they work another one in here.

The worst example of "Mission: Impossible 2"'s unoriginality is that it brings the stock action film plot of the '90s into this decade: "Mission: Impossible 2" is yet another "terrorists have a weapon of mass destruction" film. In this case, Dr. Nekhorvich, feels remorse for having created Chimera, decides to meet with IMF agent Ethan Hunt, and takes the virus and its antidote to the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta. Unfortunately Sean Ambrose (Dougray Scott)--the rogue IMF agent--intercepts Dr. Nekhorvich on his way from Australia to the U.S.. Ambrose and his cronies plan to extort millions using the virus, and only Ethan and the IMF force can stop them,

Fortunately, while the story is trite, I doubt anyone will go to "Mission: Impossible 2" for the plot. This is a special effects movie. They bash expensive cars into each other at high speed in exotic locations, and they do it well. When Ethan breaks into the lab where Chimera was created, don't expect him to use the front door. (Getting back onto the subject of allusions, that break in will look very familiar to anyone who saw the first "Mission: Impossible" movie or its numerous parodies.) There is an impressive assortment of well-done martial arts in many of the fight scenes--a credit to Cruise, who reportedly did many of his own stunts.

Unfortunately while Cruise deserves credit as a stuntman, his acting is a notch below what it was in "Eyes Wide Shut." He comes across as having a little too much fun for a man who is trying to prevent a plague. Frequent references to Ethan Hunt's "silly grin" just aren't enough to compensate for this, nor is a generally good supporting cast.

"Mission: Impossible 2" is fairly safe for teens. For a PG-13 movie, there is a little less than the typical amount of strong language. There are some hints at sex--suggestive comments and a couple waking up together--but nothing beyond kissing is seen in terms of sex or nudity. Some young children may be scared by the talk about the pathogen, which is described as being related to the flu. The real concern is the violence. There is a lot of it, and it is sometimes bloody.

If you like action movies, then "Mission: Impossible 2" probably won't disappoint you. The movie takes the tried and true action movie formula, and sticks to it perfectly, though perhaps too perfectly.


Title: "Mission: Impossible 2"
Release date: May 24, 2000

MPAA rating: PG-13
Overall rating: ***

Aprox. run time: 125 min.
Director: John Woo
Writers: Robert Towne (screenplay), Ronald D. Moore, Brannon Braga (story); based on the television program "Mission: Impossible"
Stars: Tom Cruise, Dougray Scott, Thandie Newton (as Nyah)


Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/MI2.htm
Added to blog site: 7/28/09

The rumors are true--"Gossip" is awful.

"Gossip"
Overall Rating: *½


In the 1960s, my aunt started a rumor to see how long it would take to get back to her--probably an experiment that many people have tried. She claimed that developers were going to restore the New Amsterdam Theater--a formerly important Broadway theater that had since become an adult entertainment complex. The rumor got back to my aunt in a matter of days. (As a curious footnote, developers did renovate the New Amsterdam Theater many years later; we've wondered if my aunt's false story gave somebody the idea.) "Gossip" is about what happens when people starting false rumors aren't smart enough to make the rumor harmless.

Derrick, Jones, and Travis (James Marsden, Lena Heady, and Norman Reedus respectively) are roommates who attend the same journalism class. While considering possible group projects, they decide to start a rumor and see how it spreads. Later, Derrick observes Naomi and Beau (Kate Hudson and Joshua Jackson) retreat to a bedroom at a party they're attending. Naomi--who has a reputation for not having sex--is drunk, and she and her boyfriend make out until she passes out. Derrick sees the whole incident from an adjoining bathroom, but nonetheless, persuades his roommates to start the rumor that the couple had sex. The rumors of sex become rumors of an orgy at first, but when the rumors then become stories about rape, Naomi herself starts to believe them.

"Gossip" wants desperately to be "Trainspotting," "Wild Things," or "Go." The movie focuses on young, libertine characters who soon demonstrate why people say Hollywood has no moral compass. Still, the first few minutes of "Gossip" almost promises a good movie. A reference to the old party game "Telephone" foreshadows what's going to happen with the rumor they start. The trendy soundtrack--featuring hit rock songs that all, in some way, deal with rumors--helps set the tone. Additionally, the movie even seems to be heading towards a moral: gossip is all fun and games until somebody loses a reputation.

"Gossip," however, doesn't take too long to fall apart, and things get worse as it goes along. Part of this is the characters' natures: I never found them likeable enough--even in a devious way--to care about them. They're stupid college kids who lie a lot. When the protagonists slide from being self-absorbed to being malicious, I stopped caring about them completely.

Since "Gossip" is about stupid and deceitful people, it's hard to weed out the "facts" that turn out to be lies from the actual plot holes. Even after you weed out the deliberate confusion and stupidity, there's still enough unintended confusion and stupidity to go around. One character's family disowned him because he raped a woman in high school; interestingly, however, they gave him a generous trust fund before telling him to get lost. Two characters who have a strong animosity for each other somehow ignore each other until about halfway through the movie. There's one scene where Derrick and Jones have sex while they're mad at each other; rather than being a surprise plot turn, they go back to hating each other, leaving a gratuitous sex scene that is totally out of place. Naomi is both from New York and from Danbury--both of which turn out to be key facts. The true coup de grace comes at the attempted climax. The fight in the final scene played out almost exactly as I expected. A death that I thought was faked turned out to be faked. Then the movie grafts a completely unbelievable happy ending on itself: the villain is revealed to the world to be a fiend and everyone else is unscathed. I, for one, didn't buy it.

I don't think there are any rumors that claim "Gossip" is fit for kids. Significant strong language and dangerous binge drinking are a concern. Though not much is shown in the sex scenes, there are, of course, numerous innuendos. The movie also has a considerable amount of violence; while the worst of the violence is not shown, there is still enough to be concerned about.

The 1990s had numerous crime movies focusing on antiheroes or villains. Some worked, and some didn't. If "Gossip" is hoping to carry the genre into this decade, however, then the genre is in serious trouble--and that's no idle gossip.


Title: "Gossip"
Release date: April 21, 2000

MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: *½

Aprox. run time: 90 min.
Director: Davis Guggenheim
Writers: Gregory Poirier (story and screenplay), Theresa Rebeck (screenplay)
Stars: James Marsden, Lena Heady, Norman Reedus, Kate Hudson, Joshua Jackson

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/reviewsbyjohn/Gossip.htm
Added to blog site: 7/28/09

Not completely boneheaded

"The Skulls"
Overall Rating: ***


"The Skulls" takes place at Yale, where Luke McNamara (Joshua Jackson) is a pre-law student. (They never use the name Yale, but that's the only Ivy League school that calls its crew team "the Bulldogs" and has the initial "Y.") Despite being poor and an orphan, Luke has made a name for himself at school by becoming the star of the crew team, which catches the attention of a secret society known as the Skulls. The Skulls are a very powerful and influential group; the president of the Skulls is Litten Mandrake (Craig T. Nelson)--a judge who seems likely to be appointed to the Supreme Court in the near future. Unfortunately, Luke's newfound friendship with Caleb Mandrake (Paul Walker)--Litten's son and another new inductee--drives a wedge between Luke and his friends Will (Hill Harper) and Chloe (Leslie Bibb), who mistrust the secret society. When Will apparently commits suicide while investigating the society for the school newspaper, Luke's relationship with the Skulls becomes strained.

In most respects, "The Skulls" is adequate--nothing more, nothing less. The actors are fine, though this doesn't mean much, since the characters are all one dimensional. The film has a few stunt sequences, and all of them are seamless--nothing spectacular but nothing requiring anything sensational. If there's a technical gaffe, it might be the cinematography--there are a few places where the color looks washed out, and one scene where the cameraman seems to be in a wrestling match with the actors.

The plot is overwrought. For instance, in the opening credits, there is text explaining that three former U. S. Presidents are among the Skulls' membership; this claim about the Skulls' power is unnecessary, however, since the groups' directors include Judge Mandrake, a senator, and the university provost, and the group gives each new member thousands of dollars, a new sports car, and a watch. Of course the group is powerful. Each member has a brand on his wrist, but no outsider ever seems to notice (maybe they leave their watches on all the time). Nobody knows quite what the Skulls are, either. Even assuming that every member kept strict secrecy, they have dozens of servants at their affairs, hired escorts for each Skull at big parties, and their very own psychiatric hospital--one would think one of the hired hands would spill something. The end result is that the Skulls may be a secret society, but it's a fairly open secret.

Despite the sometimes melodramatic plot, though, I have to admit that I was interested. OK, there are places where "The Skulls" is obvious: did anyone think that poor Luke was going to spend the rest of his life in the Skull's mental hospital? Despite its excesses, "The Skulls" holds a few surprises, though.

There are also some nice touches. John Pogue looked through a name book before writing the scrip: Luke, who is determined to break the Skulls' secrecy to find the truth behind Will's death, has a name that means "light;" "Caleb" means "bold and impetuous"--and Caleb is certainly impetuous; a mandrake is a type of poisonous plant, again, appropriate for both the senior and junior Mandrakes. I also have to wonder if Luke was on the crew team because the boats are called "sculls"--a term never used in the movie. Shots of the boats themselves have symbolism--before he joins the Skulls and after he starts to mistrust the group, Luke, is often seen rowing, but while he's a loyal member of the Skulls, he is only seen riding in a power boat. An allusion to "Alice in Wonderland" doesn't hurt, either.

There's no secret conspiracy behind the PG-13 rating for "The Skulls"--it earns it. There are a several violent sequences, including on-screen murders. While the obligatory sex scene shows practically nothing (the camera fades out before underwear is removed), the movie has its share of strong language, and one scene where a character consumes a drug-laced drink.

"The Skulls" is by no measure a great film; there is nothing great about it. It's adequate. Fortunately, that adequacy is enough to support an entertaining thriller for about two hours--and that's no secret.

Title: "The Skulls"
Release date: March 31, 2000

MPAA rating: PG-13
Overall rating: ***

Aprox. run time: 107 min.
Director: Rob Cohen
Writers: John Pogue
Stars: Joshua Jackson, Paul Walker, Craig T. Nelson, Hill Harper, Leslie Bibb

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Skulls.htm
Added to blog site: 8/5/09

Oh, well

"Erin Brokovich"
Overall Rating: **½


Does everybody hate and mistrust lawyers? Maybe not everybody, but the title character of "Erin Brokovich," played by Julia Roberts, does. Erin Brokovich is an unemployed, single mother of three. After an unsuccessful job interview, she gets into a bad traffic accident. She hires Ed Masry (Albert Finney) as her lawyer; despite his assurances that they have a good case, they lose. Through a combination of begging and buffaloing Masry, Erin Brokovich finds a job as a legal secretary.

Julia Roberts is the driving force for this movie. Her character is on screen for just about the entire length of the movie. Despite a tendency to break out into profanity-filled tirades when provoked, she is compelling. Though she's crass and ill-tempered, Brokovich is dedicated to her work, and manages to make something of herself because of that dedication. She is imperfect but admirable. Roberts' performance is definitely the high point of the movie--more than its plot, the film is about her character. Her character is a laudable go-getter one moment, and her own worst enemy the next. Roberts makes Erin a likable character despite her flaws and because of her strengths.

You might think a movie about a legal secretary would be dull. Yes, it does drag in a few places--but not many. Certainly not what you'd expect for a two-hour-plus movie. There are a couple of brief "chase" scenes--but mostly, the action comes from business travel to and from the small town of Hinkley, coupled with the normally frantic pace of day-to-day life. The latter also helps to make Brokovich a sympathetic character.

If you like Julia Roberts, then "Erin Brokovich" may be for you. If on the other hand, you prefer John Travolta, then "A Civil Action" offers the same plotline. "Fire Down Below" and several episodes of "MacGyver" are also very similar. "Erin Brokovich" presents another case of a big corporate polluter being brought down by the lone crusader out for justice. They're poisoning the water, and someone has to take them to task. "Erin Brokovich" sticks to the formula--someone even makes a threatening phone call to Brokovich. Granted, the writers were limited by the fact that they used a true story as their basis--however, the movie winds up telling a story that has been told over and over again in recent years. The resulting canned plot and common theme that makes for little originality.

The movie also has plenty of flaws in how it presents the plot. Despite several narrative paragraphs at the end of the film detailing what happens to Erin professionally, Erin's love life at the end is resolved only with vague implication. Erin's conflict with her children is also badly handled. Her son (Scotty Leavenworth) actively resents her for not being there, but, near the end, there's a very contrived "Kodak moment" where he "learns" that his mother is doing important work, which just makes everything all right. (No indication how this affects his sisters.) It's very frustrating that what could be considered the main conflict is resolved so easily and in such an affected manner. Equally frustrating is that the movie has the chance to deal with a real issue--the difficulty of balancing career and family--but does its best to ignore it.

On the other hand, "Erin Brokovich" does have some good points. For instance, there is the scene used in the previews where Erin tells a group of lawyers who represent the guilty company and maintain there's nothing wrong with the water, that their drinking water comes from one of the wells in question. The scenes where Brokovich manipulates a simple file clerk to gain access to records she needs are also very amusing. Some of the film's best scenes aren't funny at all, such as the touching scenes when Brokovich interviews the families who use the poisoned wells. "Erin Brokovich" lives from moment to moment.

The main reason why "Erin Brokovich" is rated R is strong language--the movie employs quite a vocabulary in many different scenes. Beyond that, there are several references to sexual acts, though nothing is shown beyond revealing clothing and kissing. As for violence, there is nothing beyond shouting.

"Erin Brokovich" has its moments. It also has Julia Roberts, who handles her role excellently. Unfortunately, it has an all too often repeated plot, weakened by a superficial treatment of Brokovich's life outside of work.


Title: "Erin Brokovich"
Release date: March 17, 2000
MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: **½
Aprox. run time: 131 min.
Director: Steven Soderbergh
Writer: Susannah Grant
Stars: Julia Roberts, Albert Finney

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/reviewsbyjohn/ErinBrok.htm

Added to blog site: 7/27/09

Lost luggage

"Final Destination"
Overall Rating: **½

One of the catchphrases from "Final Destination" is "In death, there are no accidents." The same cannot be said of Hollywood productions.

Alex Browning (Devon Sawa) is part of a student group going to Paris. Despite his anxiety about the flight, he quickly settles in to his seat and dozes off. It doesn't take long for him to wake up screaming--he dreamt that the plane blew up shortly after takeoff. When a latch holding a tray table in place breaks, in exactly the same way it did in the dream, Alex starts screaming that the plane is about to blow up. Not surprisingly, Alex is escorted off the plane. Four of his friends and his teacher follow him off the plane. While the group is regaining their composure and making plans to catch a later flight, they watch the plane take off--and explode seconds later.

That's about when the willing suspension of disbelief flies away. Alex practically tackles a stewardess trying to get off the plane, screaming about the impending explosion. Do they search the plane? No--it takes off promptly once the disruptive passenger is off the plane. Do they arrest Alex? No, even though they regularly arrest people for less serious disruptions to flights, Alex is free to go after being questioned. Once he's released, things really get chaotic, for Alex and his friends have cheated death, and death will come back for them--usually in the most bizarre manner possible. Without giving away how anyone dies, one of the deaths would have been prevented by a normal circuit breaker, and another by ordinary caution. One of Alex's friends--Billy Hitchcock (Seann W. Scott) presents another mystery: why is death after him at all, when he would have missed the plane to begin with? All hope abandon, ye who use logic here.

How are the special effects? Generally excellent. The problem is that the manner in which the characters' lives are threatened is so outlandish, that depicting it well becomes a moot point.

The cast is also excellent, to the extent permitted by the script. Devon Sawa's Alex--the film's protagonist--has an emotional range from slightly nervous to scared out of his wits. The limitation is the fault of the writers, not Sawa. While his role here is more limited than his character in "Idle Hands" (a horror film parody where Sawa shines as a slacker with a possessed hand) Sawa manages to be a convincingly "normal" student in unbelievable circumstances. I could say the same about Ali Larter, who plays Alex's pessimistic love interest, student-artist Clear (a strange spelling of "Clare"). Or Kerr Smith, who plays Carter--a bully, who was also among the students who got off the plane. Or just about any other member of the cast. That's what's frustrating: all of the main players capture their character's personalities--but their one-dimensional characters neither develop nor change.

"Final Destination" definitely earns its R rating. There is a very graphic depiction of a plane crash, and some very bloody death sequences. Beyond that, there is strong language, one scene where a character (and the audience) looks at a picture of a nude woman, and a scene where teenage characters drink alcoholic beverages (albeit in Europe, where teen drinking is both legal and accepted).

There is an old story of a man in Baghdad, who, when he learned he'd die the next day, decided to travel to Samarra to avoid death; when Death saw him in Baghdad, Death commented that he was surprised to see the man there, because he had an appointment with him in Samarra the next day. Both that story and "Final Destination" make the same point: you can't live your entire life simply trying to avoid death. In that regard, "Final Destination" is more intelligent than the average teen-oriented horror film--it has a theme. And there are some nice touches, such as a model plane that points up before the plane crash but points down after it, or such as the man handing out religious pamphlets at the airport.

Admittedly, I'm no fan of the horror genre. Still, in my opinion, "Final Destination" seems to have started with a good idea, and attracted some acting and production talent; unfortunately, it's shot down by a goofy plot.


Title: "Final Destination"
Release date: March 17, 2000

MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: **½

Aprox. run time:100 min.
Director: James Wong
Writers: Jeffrey Reddick (story and screenplay), Glen Morgan, James Wong (screenplay)
Stars: Devon Sawa, Ali Larter, Kerr Smith, Kristen Cloke (as Mrs. Lewton), Seann W. Scott

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/reviewsbyjohn/Final_D.htm

Added to blog site: 7/27/09

Mars: A Space Odyssey

"Mission to Mars"
Overall Rating: ***½


The "Mars Face" is one of the most recognizable features of the solar system. NASA maintains that the face-like feature is merely an optical illusion, but to aficionados of the paranormal, it is an architectural message as important and cryptic as the pyramids. How much longer could we have gone without a sci-fi movie exploring the ins and outs of this mysterious feature of the Cydonia region?

"Mission to Mars" opens the night before the first mission to Mars blasts off. The astronauts are having a party to celebrate their last night on Earth; there, we meet lifelong friends Luke Graham (Don Cheadle), the commander of the first mission, Woody Blake (Tim Robbins), the commander of the follow-up mission leaving in a year, and Jim McConnell (Gary Sinise), perhaps, among the three friends, the most dedicated to the Mars mission. McConnell isn't scheduled to go to Mars, however; his wife's protracted illness forced him to drop out of the training program at the last minute. When a strange phenomenon kills all the members of the first team except Luke, however, Jim quickly plans out a rescue mission--and Jim is the only man to command it.

If "Mission to Mars" doesn't remind you of "2001: a Space Odyssey," chances are that you've missed either "2001" or "Mission to Mars." "Mission to Mars" is a bit more straightforward than "2001," it's a little friendlier, but it's practically the same movie; just replace the monolith with the "Mars face," and drop Hal. Some elements seem almost straight out of the earlier film--both films' spaceships look alike, and the white room used in the climactic scenes (and previews) of "Mission to Mars" strongly resembles the room at the end of "2001." "Mission to Mars" even has a brief scene depicting man's evolution (though the presentation is significantly different from the apemen scenes in "2001"). Homage? Perhaps--to an extent. "Mission to Mars" also has a character named Luke who spends one scene talking about a mysterious "force" ("Star Wars" reference?), a spaceship commanded by a man named Jim ("Star Trek" reference?), and overt reference to "Flash Gordon." I do have to give the filmmakers credit--this is the first sci-fi film I've seen with the Mars Face in it. I came away from this movie, however, thinking how much it reminded me of "2001."

Despite its apparently unoriginal origins, the story is engrossing. Between the déjà vu and the previews, I had a fairly strong idea of where the story was going. Nonetheless, it was interesting to see how they got there, and is exciting in places--the scenes right before the second mission lands on Mars had me on the edge of my seat. That sequence alone is worth the price of admission.

The movie is bolstered by second-to-none visual effects. There's one sequence that looks slightly animated, but it's supposed to, since the film is depicting an extremely sophisticated animated simulation. The images of Mars from the space probe, the Pathfinder-like robot rover, and the World Space Station are better effects; they are visually stunning. The best are the zero gravity effects--if the movie has a memorable scene, it's probably when Phil (Jerry O'Connell) makes a three-dimensional model of a DNA molecule out of M&Ms.

"Mission to Mars" is fairly safe for the whole family. There is some strong language, but less than many other PG films. There are some references to sex, though veiled enough that I doubt younger children would get them. There are also a few graphic deaths--including a very dramatic suicide and several deaths under mysterious circumstances. Some of these deaths, and another scene where a man is injured on a spaceship are moderately bloody, but the film on the whole always manages to avoid going too far.

Perhaps the funniest moment is buried deep in the credits; though set in Texas, on Mars, and in space, the movie was "Filmed on location in British Columbia." The biggest mystery in "Mission to Mars" is probably what part of British Columbia looks like Cydonia, Mars; nonetheless, the movie is a visual effects feast that should satisfy sci-fi fans.


Title: "Mission to Mars"
Release date: March 10, 2000

MPAA rating: PG
Overall rating: ***½

Aprox. run time: 113 min.
Director: Brian De Palma
Writers: Lowell Cannon (story), Jim Thomas, John Thomas (story and screenplay), Graham Yost (screenplay)
Stars: Gary Sinise, Tim Robbins, Connie Nielsen (Dr. Terri Fisher), Don Cheadle, Jerry O'Connell

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/M2Mars.htm
Added to blog site: 7/28/09

One to wonder about

"Wonder Boys"
Overall Rating: ****


This review gave me fierce writer's block. It might have had something to do with the subject matter of the film--a film about writers, college professors, and literature majors hits close to home for me. More likely, it's that while "Wonder Boys" is very good, there's something wrong with it that I can't put my finger on. In any event, this is one film that left me wondering what to say.

Prof. Grady Tripp (Michael Douglas), the author of a great novel (both in literary and sales terms), is having the most chaotic day of his life. His wife left him that morning, and she couldn't have picked a worse day--it's the first day of Wordfest, his university's writers' festival. Tripp's editor, Terry Crabtree (Robert Downey Jr.) and his homosexual lover are coming to town for the festival. Crabtree desperately wants to see Tripp's latest book, only Tripp hasn't finished it yet (he's on page 2611, and still writing). Then he goes to the reception for the festival--held at the house of Susan Gaskell (Frances McDromand), the chancellor of his department and his lover. When he tries to tell her about his wife, she drops a bombshell of her own: she's pregnant, by him. Subsequently, he runs into James Leer (Tobey Maguire) at the party. Things get truly chaotic when the Gaskell's dog attacks Tripp, and Leer shoots the dog.

This film is an actors' film more than any other recent production. Michael Douglas and Tobey Maguire are both excellent. Tripp is the main cause of his own woes, but Douglas makes Tripp a likeable character anyway, and when Tripp overcomes those flaws, it's that much better. Maguire also makes his melancholy prodigy, who seems like a cross between Will Hunting from "Good Will Hunting" and Ricky Fitts from "American Beauty," the perfect foil to Tripp, into whose life he brings so much chaos. Coupled with a strong supporting cast, the two lead actors make the film a joy to watch.

"Wonder Boys" also has an interesting story. It's ahead of the game, having a plot that makes perfect sense. The wit is always sharp, obvious from the opening moments when we hear just how sensitive the writing class really is. "Wonder Boys" also has some nice touches. For instance, Prof. Tripp's name is highly appropriate, considering the amount of drugs he consumes. A subplot with Tripp's car develops nicely (pay close attention to what Tripp says about how he got the car--it will be important later on). What ultimately happens with Tripp's massive novel is also absolutely perfect.

Where I get lost is on what went wrong. Douglas and Maguire both deliver brilliant performances, and the movie itself is well written. Somehow, though, the movie doesn't come together the way it should. Coming from a movie critic, I realize that that's very vague. Maybe it's just that the movie goes too far. While academia is crazy, it's not as crazy as the movie depicts--I can go on record that I have never shot any of my professors' pets. In any case, I don't mean to make "Wonder Boys" sound like a disaster--it certainly isn't. In the end, I gave "Wonder Boys" the benefit of the doubt and four stars as an overall rating--but not without hesitation.

Parents will probably want to be careful with this one. There is some violence and some sexual content, though that's not how the film earns its R rating. There is copious strong language, and pervasive drug use. The characters also take a very casual attitude towards gun safety, and there are some questionable student-teacher relationships (a suggested sexual interest, and a scene where Tripp shares some dope with one of his students).

"Wonder Boys" lampoons the literary and academic worlds very nicely. While something that I can't quite put my finger on bothered me about "Wonder Boys," it still has a delightful story that's well presented.


Title: "Wonder Boys"
Release date: February 25, 2000

MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: ****

Aprox. run time: 112 min.
Director: Curtis Hanson
Writers: Michael Chabon (novel), Steven Kloves
Stars: Michael Douglas, Tobey Maguire

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Wonder.htm

Added to blog site: 8/5/09

Don't Skip this one

"My Dog Skip"
Overall Rating: ***


"My Dog Skip" is a nice movie. It promotion seems to be targeting kids, but it is not strictly speaking a kids' movie. This is a sentimental, boy-grows-up-with-his-dog movie.

"My Dog Skip" takes place in Yazoo, Mississippi, during World War II. There, Willie Morris (Frankie Muniz) is a shy, bookish child who is ostracized because he doesn't play football. His only friend, is his next door neighbor, Dink Jenkins (Luke Wilson)--the town's star athlete; only Dink, who is many years Willie's senior, is about to go off and fight in the war. Though Willie's father (Kevin Bacon) is opposed to the idea, his mother (Diane Lane) decides to get Willie a dog for his ninth birthday, to keep him company in Dink's absence. Soon, Willie's dog Skip proves to be the hit of the town.

The movie has a number of extraneous elements. The way the movie handles--or rather, doesn't handle--segregation is a case in point. Skip occasionally wanders into the black neighborhoods, with the narrator commenting that perhaps the dog, being "color-blind," was wiser than the people. There are also occasional debates as to whether Dink Jenkins really was better than the black high-school's star athlete. That's as close as the film gets to condemning the Jim Crow laws; the movie isn't primarily about segregation, however, and the subject is forgotten almost as quietly as it's brought up. Dink Jenkins becomes another case-in-point. His return to the town turns out to be very awkward, and the question soon becomes whether he'll ever find his place in the town; in fact, we never get an answer to that question: the movie ends before Jenkins finds his place again. Not having read Morris' autobiographical memoir--the basis for the movie--I don't know if it shares the movie's tendency to bring up themes and subplots only to abandon them. Morris may not have known what happened to Jenkins, for instance.

The animal trainers deserve credit for their efforts in "My Dog Skip." Skip is as cute a dog as you could hope for in any movie, The highlight is a scene where Willie has Skip perform various tricks--but Skip, while doing each trick perfectly, does the wrong trick every time. One thing is certain--Skip's performance leaves no doubt as to why everyone loved the little dog.

Among the human actors, Kevin Bacon also deserves credit. Jack Morris is a stern man, but not completely heartless. Bacon manages to keep his character from seeming like an ogre--not an easy task, considering that Willie's father is the main obstacle between Willie and Skip,

There are some nicely handled sequences. For instance, an episode in the woods is a good red herring--leading you to think something will happen later on.

Whether or not "My Dog Skip" is a kids' movie, it is fairly safe for the whole family. There is a little strong language--though very little. There are also a couple of scenes where there is some violence--though the film suggests much more than it shows. Parents may also want to know that there is a fairly bloody hunting sequence, and a scene where a student in Willie's class brings an antique musket to show and tell.

I suspect my feelings for this movie are influenced somewhat by my school days. Like the young protagonist of "My Dog Skip," I was constantly teased in school--that is probably a constant for nerds. Nearly every other particular of my life is different from the movie, however, and, while "My Dog Skip" is endearing, it's not nearly as endearing to me as any of my cats.


Title: "My Dog Skip"
Release date: 1/12/00 (limited) / 3/6/00 (nationwide)

MPAA rating: PG
Overall rating: ***

Aprox. run time: 95 min.
Director: Jay Russell
Writers: Willie Morris (book), Gail Gilchriest
Stars: Frankie Muniz, Diane Lane, Luke Wilson, Kevin Bacon


Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Dog_Skip.htm
Added to blog site: 7/30/09

The hitman next door is a miss

"The Whole Nine Yards"
Overall Rating: **


Somewhere along the line, mobsters became fair game for comedies. "Analyze This," about a mafioso in psychotherapy, and "Gun Shy," a romantic comedy focusing on a police officer pursuing the mob, both had funny previews. I haven't seen either movie (in fact, "Gun Shy" hasn't been released yet), but, like them, "The Whole Nine Yards" had amusing previews--unfortunately, "The Whole Nine Yards" isn't as good as its advertising.

Nicholas "Oz" Oseransky (Matthew Perry) is an unsuccessful dentist and a henpecked husband. His wife, Sophie (Rosanna Arquette) dragged him back to her native Montreal and berates him for not making enough money. Then, when he comes home from work one day, he meets his new neighbor. He soon realizes his new neighbor is Jimmy "The Tulip" Tudeski (Bruce Willis), an ex-hitman hiding from mobster Yanni Gogolack (Kevin Pollack). Just when Oz starts to build a tense friendship with Jimmy, his wife puts him on a plane to Chicago so he can tip off the mob and collect the bounty on Tudeski's head. Oz plans to meet with a friend in Chicago, maybe have an affair, and, above all, avoid any contact with the mob; but when he finds hitman Frankie Figs (Michael Clarke Duncan) in his hotel room, his plans soon change.

"The Whole Nine Yards" doesn't quite know whether it wants to be a comedy or a crime movie--and fails twice as a result. It's amusing when Oz first realizes who his new neighbor is--and instantly goes from a slight feeling of deja vu to sheer terror. What's funny for two minutes begins to get annoying after an hour. The problem is that the movie takes all the mob activities perfectly seriously, and relies on Oz's awkwardness around the criminals as the sole source of jokes. We have mob enforcers planning to kill each other, and only one poor schmuck tripping over himself and drinking himself blind in the background as a distraction. This gives the audience a few funny moments, such as when Oz runs into a glass door, or when Jimmy throws Oz a beer--and the stunned Oz doesn't even try to catch it. Most straight crime-dramas are funnier and much less tedious, than "The Whole Nine Yards."

The movie also strains credibility in several places. For instance, why does Oz stay with his shrew of a wife? When she and her mother are ruining his personal, professional, and financial lives, how could the disastrous divorce settlement he fears possibly be worse? It's not love--putting aside their mutual acrimony, while he's in Chicago, Oz falls in love with another woman; of course, the awkward protagonist falling in love with the worst possible woman at the worst possible time, with no explanation other than the fact that the woman in question was there and vaguely disliked him (old romantic comedy technique--if you hate someone, it's true love), doesn't exactly help the film's credibility either. Neither does the fact that his lover--who nearly everyone else in the film has a reason to kill--is still alive despite her frequent contact with mobsters. It might be one thing if the non sequiturs were funny, but they're not jokes; they're just careless writing.

The movie isn't a total loss. There are a few funny moments. Bruce Willis delivers a strong performance; his character isn't as complex as Dr. Crowe from "The Sixth Sense" (or even Harry Stamper from "Armageddon"), but, there's something to an actor who can make a mob hitman likeable. Similarly, Michael Clarke Duncan is also charming (though at this point, I'm not sure what it says when a movie's only likeable characters are mass murderers).

While "The Whole Nine Yards" may try to appear kinder and gentler than your average crime movie, don't let that fool you. There are several on-screen murders, plenty of strong language, a fairly strong sex scene, and full frontal nudity.

Apparently, the expression "the whole nine yards" comes from World War II machine gunners' ammunition belts being nine yards long--"the whole nine yards" meant that you shot off all you could without reloading. In contrast, while the title phrase may tell of a lot of ammunition, the movie "The Whole Nine Yards" itself fires blanks.

Title: "The Whole Nine Yards"
Release date: February 18, 2000

MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: **

Aprox. run time: 99 min.
Director: Jonathan Lynn
Writer: Mitchell Kapner
Stars: Bruce Willis, Matthew Perry, Natasha Henstridge (as Cynthia)

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/9Yards.htm

Added to blog site: 8/5/09

Luck of the Irish

"Angela's Ashes"
Overall Rating: ***½

In "Angela's Ashes," Frank McCourt, while describing all the offenses for which he can get lashed in school, mentions that one teacher would punish him for not knowing Michael Collins was the greatest man in the world, while another would punish him for not knowing that Eamon De Valera was the greatest man in the world. In a way, that line summarizes the whole film: it illustrates some of the inconsistencies of Frank McCourt's young life and how he coped, and shows the dominance that the Irish setting and its culture plays in the film itself.

Upon the death of their daughter, Angela and Malachy McCourt (Emily Watson and Robert Carlyle) return to Limerick from New York with their four surviving children, Frank, Malachy Jr., Eugene, and Oliver. Despite the fact that Ireland is, to quote Frank, a place "...where there was no work and people were dying of the starvation and the damp," the family hopes that the old country will provide the stability they need to recover. Malachy's northern, Protestant, roots and his alcoholism, however, not only leave him unemployable, but bring scorn from Angela's family. Things get even worse when young Oliver dies.

"Angela's Ashes" is confusing in places. For instance, there is a sequence where Malachy leaves home, apparently abandoning Angela and the children for good; however, he returns to Ireland with the family. There's also another scene where a coffin is in a pub--with no explanation of why. Some of the points I misunderstood may have been my own ignorance of Irish culture--you need some knowledge about Ireland, or you will be left scratching your head in many places. I also suspect that many of these confusing points are the result of the transition from McCourt's book to the screen. For instance, the film never explains the title. To be completely fair, everywhere I've seen McCourt quoted, he gave the adaptation glowing praise, and I haven't read his book, so I can't really comment on the adaptation.

The pace of the film is also extremely slow. This is a two-edge sword: the film is supposed to be slow-paced, presenting a somber, nostalgic coming of age story that takes place over many years. While a fast pace would be inappropriate, "Angela's Ashes," felt drawn out in a number of places.

There is no question about the cinematography. "Angela's Ashes" is beautifully photographed--it is simply magnificent to look at. This is not surprising, since director Alan Parker's previous effort, "Evita," also had stunning photography--"Angela's Ashes," however, is even better.

And despite the few confusing points, "Angela's Ashes," is well written. There are many nice touches, such as the scene where Frank's mother sends him to the pub after his father that tugs at your heart. Granted, the film is based on McCourt's life, but the presentation manages to evoke sympathy for the McCourt children and succeeds in tying Frank's diverse experiences together into a coherent whole.

The cast is also excellent. Emily Watson is very good. Angela is very nearly insane after the death of her daughter; Watson manages to walk the tightrope of acting nearly, but not completely, mad. Also, all of the younger members of the cast are astonishingly good. In particular, Joe Breen, who plays Frank in his early years, is excellent. Breen, who is eight-years-old, delivers a performance in one of the leading roles that puts many adult actors' efforts to shame.

Don't be fooled by the cute kid on the poster, "Angela's Ashes" is not intended for children. There is some violence (a couple of scenes where people hit each other), several nude scenes, some significant sexual content, and frequent strong language. The biggest concern would be the strong thematic content--the very graphic depiction of the damage alcoholism and poverty do to the McCourt family will probably be extremely disturbing to young children.

"Angela's Ashes" presents an interesting problem for me as a critic. The film is very well made, painting a vivid picture of Ireland in the '30s and '40s. While I'm sure it will be immensely enjoyable to some of my readers, it wasn't my taste in movies.

Title: "Angela's Ashes"
Release date: 12/25/99 (limited) / 1/21/00 (nationwide)
MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: ***½
Aprox. run time: 146 min.
Director: Alan Parker
Writers: Frank McCourt (book), Laura Jones, Alan Parker (screenplay)
Stars: Emily Watson, Robert Carlyle, Joe Breen, Ciaran Owens (Adolescent Frank), Michael Legge (Adult Frank)

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Ang_Ash.htm
Added to blog site: 7/26/09

When is a Nightingale a turkey?

"Supernova"
Overall Rating: *½


Warning: this review contains information that may spoil the ending, if that's possible.

Scroll down 50 lines
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

---

Astronomically, a supernova is what happens when a star explodes and dies. In a similar manner, the movie "Supernova" has a plotline that explodes and dies.

Nick Vanzant (James Spader) is a recovering drug addict who is the second in command of the rescue vessel Nightingale. When the ship receives a distress call from Carl Larson, a former lover of ship doctor Kaela Evers (Angela Bassett), they respond immediately. They must use the dimensional shift, however, requiring the crew to take refuge in dimensional stabilization units (referred to as "DSU"s). When they come out of the dimensional shift, the ship is caught in an asteroid field that damages the fuel tank, and Captain Marley dies from the effects of a damaged DSU--leaving Nick in command of the ship. Then Troy Larson (Peter Facinelli) shows up, and things become really chaotic.

"Supernova" is really about gratuitous sex, on screen violence, and special effects. Mostly, the special effects are good--the dimensional shift is dazzling. The spacescapes are wonderful. They have sets that would have been the envy of the original "Star Trek" TV show, then they smash them nicely. Even though the special effects are its main strength, "Supernova" has some special effects gaffes. For instance, a character has different colored eyes in one scene; however, that scene contains a sequence where both his eyes are the same color.

While problems with the special effects are occasional, problems with the logic are omnipresent. The computer allows the villain to eject two crewmembers out of airlocks--but an instant later, when the programmer (who the computer apparently has a crush on) is in mortal danger, it won't allow him to kill the villain, or even open the door and escape. Larson has been waiting for five days for help--but Captain Marley risks his own life using a broken DSU so they can respond immediately. Nick, who doesn't trust Troy, takes his word that there's fuel on the moon, but ignores the possibility of booby traps. Dr. Evers suddenly stops hating Nick, and falls in love with him. The real coup de grace is the ending. Normally, I try not to give it away, but while I like a "lady and the tiger" ending, the computer's announcement that the effects of a phenomenon will either destroy all life on Earth, or make it much better (though the computer doesn't know which) is just a bit too much.

In addition to the overt non-sequiturs, there are also the futuristic trappings that leave the viewer confused. When Dr. Evers says she can't have children, does that mean she's sterile, or that she was denied permission by the government's population control authorities? For that matter, considering that humanity has the ability to travel to worlds beyond our solar system, and hasn't yet found extraterrestrial life, why is overpopulation even a problem? Though the Nightingale is a rescue vessel, and presumably would pick up survivors from distress calls, why does it only have enough DSUs for the crew? Who built the alien artifact? What will the fate of Earth be? Answers to these questions are too much to hope for.

While following the movie is difficult, it's easy to figure out where it's going. I was disappointed when I realized I not only correctly predicted who the villain really was, but which crewmembers would survive the mission. While the computer's bizarre announcement comes out of nowhere, "Supernova" is generally predictable.

"Supernova" is not for children. (It's not for adults, either, but that's another matter.) There is a great deal of often gory violence, frequent nudity including several sex scenes, significant strong language, and a number of references to drug use (though the references are to a futuristic drug called "hazin"). The movie should be rated R.

There is one good line in the film: when Dr. Evers asks Nick when he's been in a more serious situation, he describes what happened a few minutes before. That one line, however, isn't enough to make up for the rest of the movie. In the end, the best thing about "Supernova," is that it's only 90 minutes long, so the viewer doesn't have to suffer for long.


Title: "Supernova"
Release date: January 14, 2000

MPAA rating: PG-13
Overall rating: *½

Aprox. run time: 90 min.
Director: Thomas Lee
Writers: David Campbell Wilson (screenplay), William Malone, Daniel Chuba (story)
Stars: James Spader, Angela Bassett

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Supernov.htm
Added to blog site: 8/5/09

Category three Hurricane

"The Hurricane"
Overall Rating: ***½


One of the greatest films of the 1960s was "In the Heat of the Night." Much of "The Hurricane" recalls that earlier effort--both were directed by Norman Jewison, both share the theme of overcoming racial prejudice, and "The Hurricane" even has a cameo performance by "In the Heat of the Night" co-star Rod Steiger. The problem with "The Hurricane" is that while it's a fairly good movie, it doesn't come close to living up to its predecessor.

"The Hurricane" is based on the true story of boxer Rubin "Hurricane" Carter (Denzel Washington). Carter was a top caliber boxer--even winning a welterweight world championship in 1963. Then in 1966, mainly due to the efforts of the vindictive and racist Detective Vincent Della Pesca (Dan Hedaya), he was convicted of a crime he did not commit. While in prison, Carter defends himself the only way he can--he writes a book telling his life's story.

Denzel Washington dominates the film. This is not surprising, since the character of Rubin "Hurricane" Carter dominates the film. Equally unsurprising, Denzel Washington delivers a flawless performance. Having won an Academy Award for "Glory," and then delivering a tour de force performance in "Malcolm X," Washington has a successful history of portraying real people on the big screen. I expected an excellent performance in "The Hurricane" and I wasn't disappointed in the least.

The film also has a compelling story. I had heard what happened to Rubin "Hurricane" Carter before I saw the film--but even knowing that, I wondered how the facts of the case unfolded. Carter must fight a great injustice--his wrongful conviction--that has roots in the even larger injustice of racism. Yet he, and a small group of committed defenders, muster their courage to battle an unjust system.

Between the inspiring story and the talent involved, "The Hurricane" should have been one of the best films of 1999. Sadly, it isn't. Much of the film is told in flashback--sometimes, especially in the first scenes, leading to jumbled results: the first scene is set in 1963, then there's a prison scene in 1973, then after another flashback to Carter's arrest, then there's a scene involving Lesra Martin (Vicellous Reon Shannon), a student activist who was instrumental in getting Carter freed, that takes place in the late '70s or early '80s. While Carter's character is understandable, the other characters' motivations are often more cryptic. Lisa Peters, Sam Chaiton, and Terry Swinton (Deborah Unger, Liev Schreiber, and John Hannah respectively), the social activists caring for Lesra, at first skeptical of Carter's innocence, almost inexplicably, become so convinced that they move from Toronto to New Jersey and investigate his case full time. While Della Pesca's irrational desire to convict Carter is explained by the film, why seemingly every cop and judge in New Jersey goes along with it isn't as clearly depicted. Jumbled flashbacks and mysterious motivations aren't the only elements that left me scratching my head. All of Carter's boxing matches are filmed in black and white, without apparent reason. Also, while in solitary confinement, Carter has a conversation with himself that is at the very least strange.

Parents should be aware that there is significant violence in "The Hurricane," most notably a depiction of the murders of which Carter was convicted. There is also significant strong language, including numerous racial slurs. However, the fact that the film depicts historical events, and Carter's strong, positive character (beyond training as an athlete, Carter educates himself while in prison, and finds the spiritual strength to fight the unjust conviction) are both mitigating factors. The content is definitely strong for young children, but, despite the R rating, is probably better for teens than most PG-13 movies.

Part of the problem may be that the film is based on two different books, and part of the problem may be that the filmmakers weren't looking critically enough at their work (Denzel Washington, for instance, is quoted on the film's website as having wanted to play Hurricane Carter for many years before the film was made). Regardless, while "The Hurricane" is worth seeing, it is far short of the film it should be.


Title:"The Hurricane"
Release date:12/25/99 (limited) / 1/14/00 (nationwide)
MPAA rating: R
Overall rating: ***½

Aprox. run time: 145 min.
Director: Norman Jewison
Writers: Rubin "Hurricane" Carter (book--The Sixteenth Round), Sam Chaiton, Terry Swinton (book--Lazarus and the Hurricane), Armyan Bernstein, Dan Gordon (screenplay)
Stars: Denzel Washington, Vicellous Reon Shannon

Original URL:
Added to blog site: 7/28/09

Golden magnolias

"Steel Magnolias"
Overall Rating: ****


Six women in a beauty parlor: it doesn't sound like a scenario that would hold much appeal for men. However, playwright Robert Harling chose that as the setting for "Steel Magnolias," based on his family's experiences, and the result holds universal appeal.

"Steel Magnolias" opens with Annelle (Daryl Hannah) applying for a job at Truvy's hair styling salon. Truvy (Dolly Parton) is impressed with her skills, and hires her, just in time to help out for an important day, since not only do two regular customers, Ouiser and Clairee (Shirley MacLaine and Olympia Dukakis) have appointments, but M'Lynn Eatonton (Sally Field) and her daughter Shelby (Julia Roberts), two more regulars, are coming in for hairstyles in preparations for Shelby's wedding. The happy day has a cloud over it, however, since Shelby can't have children because of her diabetes.

The movie has plenty of laughs. For instance, when Drum (M'Lynn's husband, played by Tom Skerritt) can't find his gun, he makes one final attempt to clear a flock of birds from a tree near their house; I laughed for about twenty minutes the first time I saw what he did--and the results. Then there are the copious amusing lines, such as when Ouiser calls Drum "a boil on the butt of humanity." You will laugh plenty while watching this movie. Despite the many jokes, however, the movie is a tearjerker. Like many dramas that employ comedy, the funniest scenes tend to be towards the beginning, and the more touching ones towards the end; having laughed with the characters makes the later scenes even more moving. It may be an old trick, but it works admirably here.

All of the lead actresses are very good. Dolly Parton, in particular, just oozes southern charm here--and is a convincing small-town hair stylist. Shirley MacLaine and Olympia Dukakis, as Ouiser and Clairee, are the best. They both capture their characters' true natures, and they play off each other beautifully. Their deliveries are flawless--important since they have many of the film's comic lines. They both have strong presences on screen, and MacLaine and Dukakis are a big part of the film's success.

"Steel Magnolias" also has some other nice touches. For instance, in one scene, after a death in the family, the entire family is filmed in shadows. Then, at the Christmas festival, the filmmakers chose to play "Walkin' in a Winter Wonderland"--ironic, since the setting isn't that cold.

The movie adaptation of "Steel Magnolias" does lose some of the tight-knit feel the play has. The play has only six characters (all women) and one set, which helps to reinforce the close friendship of the women. The greater expanse of the film undermines this somewhat; on the other hand, the film does get one of the funniest movie sequences in return.

There isn't too much to be concerned about with children and this movie. There is a fairly dramatic (though non-violent) death scene, one shot showing numerous condoms taped to a car, and some strong language. While the PG rating is reasonable, I imagine that children, especially younger children would lose patience with "Steel Magnolias" during the serious scenes. It's not intended for children.

Many people complain that Hollywood doesn't make nice films anymore. There may be fewer such films now, but "Steel Magnolias" is definitely one of them. It's about nice people, and is amusing and moving. Even more importantly, it is very entertaining. "Steel Magnolias" may be the title, but this movie is pure gold.


Note: If you want to see the play "Steel Magnolias" for comparison, and live in the Jacksonville area, the Alhambra dinner theater is doing it in the summer of 2000. The last time they did it, they did an excellent job.

Title: "Steel Magnolias"
Release date: 1989

MPAA rating: PG
Overall rating: ****

Aprox. run time: 119 min.
Director: Herbert Ross
Writers: Robert Harling (play and screenplay)
Stars: Sally Field, Dolly Parton, Shirley MacLaine, Daryl Hannah, Olympia Dukakis, Julia Roberts

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/SteelMag.htm
Added to blog site: 8/5/09

Out of this world

"Stargate"
Overall Rating: ****½


The 1990s has been a decade for action and sci-fi movies. With sharper computer animation and bigger budgets, the special effects are getting more ambitious and often more impressive. Sadly, films will frequently rely completely on their visual effects, leaving the audience with a weak or non-existent plot; "Stargate" gets it right--they start with an exciting story and use the effects to boost it.

"Stargate" opens in Egypt of 1928, where an archeologist uncovers a large ring with mysterious writing on it. Its function remains a mystery until 1994, when an unconventional Egyptologist, Dr. Daniel Jackson (James Spader), is called in to investigate. Jackson discovers that the artifact is called a "stargate," and deciphers the cryptic writing on it--allowing the military to use it to open a wormhole to a distant galaxy. Under the command of Col. O'Niel (Kurt Russell), a team is sent through the stargate to investigate. Once they're on that distant planet, the question soon becomes who or what will the team find.

While all the actors are good, James Spader stands out. His character may be something of a standard nerd, but he's very endearing, partially from the writing but mostly from Spader's performance. His performance is excellent.

"Stargate" also has some nice touches. For instance, while the team is on the distant planet, there are no scenes on Earth--by not showing Earth, the filmmakers help reenforce the team's isolation.

I must admit, I didn't really notice the allusions to the Biblical book Daniel until I read another viewer's comments on the Internet Movie Database--but it's there, and highly appropriate. While it's not a strict adaptation of that book, Daniel deals with the Babylonian captivity and the writing on the wall, which have an obvious relevance to events in the film. Nor is the reference just for show: the theme of "Stargate" questions the role organized religion plays in peoples' lives. The main focus may be on ancient Egypt's pagan religion, but its questions are universal. The filmmakers also wanted to display the good in religion, and the allusion to the Bible performs that function extremely well.

Biblical allusions aside, however, like any good action/sci-fi film, "Stargate" has excellent special effects. The variety ranges from spaceship battles to alien animals to futuristic weapons--the quality is always excellent. Not all the effects are for pitched battles; one stunt sequence is hilarious (and one of the strangest first contact sequences ever). Unlike most action-sci-fi films, however, the story itself is thoroughly engrossing and exhilarating--the special effects are merely icing on the cake.

The big problem with "Stargate" is that several scenes are too dark to see. This undermines several fight sequences, since it's hard to tell what's happening. While you can figure out what happened later on, somewhat mitigating the situation, the darkness doesn't really fit with the film's feel. It's simply that the room was supposed to be dark, and wound up too dark.

While some of the fight scenes are hard to see, parents wary of violence should be aware that there is also significant violence that is clearly seen. Some of the violence is bloody (including a sequence with a severed body part), there is some strong language, and there's one scene where an apparently underage character tries to smoke (though goes into a fit of coughing from it). Parents should also be advised that there are references to a child dying from an accidental shooting. PG-13 is a fair rating for it; the film may be too intense for younger children, but is probably safe for teens.

Director Roland Emmerich is probably better known for his later work, "Independence Day;" while "Independence Day" is a top-notch action/sci-fi thrill ride that is easily worth the price of the video, I think "Stargate" is every bit as exciting, but more uplifting and intriguing. What I hope for with every action film is what I got with "Stargate."

Note: A disadvantage of loving this movie as much as I do is that I acquired the movie before the special edition came out. The special edition contains nine minutes of additional footage, including a new opening depicting something described later in the film. While the original version is perfectly enjoyable, I'd recommend the expanded version, if available.


Title: "Stargate"
Release date: 1994

MPAA rating: PG-13
Overall rating: ****½

Aprox. run time: 119/128 min.
Director: Roland Emmerich
Writers: Roland Emmerich, Dean Devlin
Stars: James Spader, Kurt Russell

Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/Stargate.htm
Added to blog site: 8/5/09