Reviews

16 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Superman flies again, but not as high as he could have.
4 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
After years of languishing in development hell, Warner Bros. finally manages to get a new Superman film into theatres. The various failed Superman movie projects have become infamous. Kevin Smith worked on a rejected screenplay and claims that producer Jon Peters insisted that the script had to follow three rules: 1. Superman can't fly, 2. Superman can't wear the cape and tights, and 3. Superman must fight a giant spider in the third act. At one point Tim Burton was attached to direct and Nicholas Cage was cast to star as the Man of Steel. Tens of millions of dollars were wasted on false starts before director Bryan Singer's vision for reinvigorating the franchise triumphed over the others.

Even though "Superman Returns" has its shortcomings, we should all be thankful that it was made instead of the other abandoned concepts. Rather than restart the series from scratch like "Batman Begins" did, "Superman Returns" is set five years after "Superman II" (the ignominious "Superman III" and "Superman IV" are conveniently forgotten). Pre-credit titles explain that Superman (Brandon Routh) left Earth five years ago after astronomers discovered the location of the planet Krypton. Unfortunately, Singer violates the old film-making dictum "show, don't tell". A sequence depicting Superman exploring the shattered remains of Krypton was cut from the finished film, so Superman's whole motivation for abandoning his loved ones and his responsibilities as Earth's protector is given short shrift before Clark Kent's back in Metropolis and resuming his job at the Daily Planet.

It's a rough homecoming for the Man of Steel. Old flame Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) has a four year old son, is dating Perry White's handsome nephew Richard (James Marsden), and has won the Pulitzer Prize for an article titled "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman". Superman still loves Lois, but she is understandably angry that he left without saying goodbye and has moved on with her life. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) is free from prison and has stolen Kryptonian crystals from the Fortress of Solitude as part of another scheme involving real estate and the destruction of Superman.

Singer's affection for the first two Superman movies that starred Christopher Reeve is obvious. Homage is paid through the opening credits, the use of John Williams' rousing theme, numerous in-jokes, and the recycling of old recordings of Marlon Brando as Jor-El. Anyone unfamiliar with "Superman: The Movie" and "Superman II" might be confused by the plot of "Superman Returns". Yet, despite many lighthearted moments, "Superman Returns" is ultimately more somber than the earlier movies. It fortunately avoids the outright camp that the old Superman movies eventually devolved into, but is not as colourful or fun either. There's some nasty violence in the third act that earns the PG-13 rating.

Spacey hams it up as Luthor, combining the humour and egotism of the Gene Hackman version with a more menacing edge. Bosworth is miscast as Lois. She's too young and bland. A better choice for Lois would have been Parker Posey, who makes the most of her supporting role as Luthor's girlfriend Kitty. Singer was wise to choose a relatively unknown actor for the role of Superman. Christopher Reeve is still the best Superman, but Brandon Routh honours his legacy. Routh had a heavy burden to carry with this role, and it is impressive that he managed to pull it off.

There are some impressive moments in "Superman Returns", but also some lost opportunities. While special effects have made leaps and bounds since the 1978 feature, the climactic action of "Superman Returns" is not as conceptually thrilling as Superman preventing the destruction of the California coastline or battling three evil Kryptonians. There is a nagging feeling of been there, done that to many sequences. There are also moments that undermine the audience's suspension of disbelief. I can believe a man can fly, but there's no way tiny Kate Bosworth could pull a drowning 225 pound man out of choppy North Atlantic waters.

"Superman Returns" does fulfill its mandate to reintroduce moviegoers to the Last Son of Krypton and erase the bad memories of "Superman III" and "Superman IV". It's a good film, but not great. Here's hoping that the cast and crew learn their lessons from this one and give us a sequel where Superman can really soar.

*** out of ****
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Sicilian (1987)
5/10
This Sicilian will make you an offer you can refuse.
11 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Based on the novel by Mario Puzo, which was in turn loosely inspired by the life of bandit, black marketeer, and separatist Salvatore Giuliano, "The Sicilian" is a confusing, self-important mess of a movie. As was the case with Rob Roy, Jesse James, and Bonnie and Clyde, popular culture once again whitewashes the acts of a real-life criminal and reinvents them as a folk hero. Set in Sicily during the 1940s, the film begins with Giuliano (Christopher Lambert) and his friend Pisciotta (John Turturro) stealing grain to feed hungry villagers. Caught in the act, Giuliano escapes after shooting a police officer, but he is seriously wounded himself (despite his life-threatening injury, Giuliano still manages to outrace the authorities and leap onto the back of a horse!). Giuliano seeks shelter in a monastery and is treated by a barber who says he will certainly die. However, Giuliano declares that he will live and makes a miraculous recovery. Giuliano's (near) death and resurrection is obviously intended as an allusion to Christ. I'm not a religious person, but I still think there's something blasphemous about comparing a thief and murderer to the Messiah.

Once fully healed, Giuliano launches a crusade to provide the poor people of Sicily with land and counter the authority of the Mafia, the Catholic Church, and the wealthy landowners. To accomplish this he becomes a bandit and flees to the mountains, eventually assembling a large following. However, Giuliano goes too far, makes powerful enemies, and (in another parallel with Christ) is betrayed by a Judas in his ranks.

If executed properly, "The Sicilian" could have been a powerful, complex tale of a man who does terrible things for noble reasons and ends up undermining everything he fought for. Unfortunately, the motion picture is plagued by poor choices. Various accents are spoken by the international cast, very few of which sound remotely Sicilian. Christopher Lambert in particular is miscast. Supporting characters come and go without contributing much to the story. Numerous factions become involved in the plot - the government, the Mafia, the church, the nobility, and the socialists - but it's not always clear whom is allied with whom or why. Many scenes were cut from the finished film by the studio and the audience can tell.

"The Sicilian" was directed by Michael Cimino, who has a very mixed track record. After directing one of the greatest movies of all time, "The Deer Hunter", Cimino was responsible for the notorious commercial and critical disaster "Heaven's Gate" (which, in retrospect, is actually not that bad). Cimino recovered somewhat with the crime thriller "Year of the Dragon", but "The Sicilian" was another step backwards for his career. Cimino at least insures that the film is well shot, but his deadly serious intentions are frequently undermined by weak performances, clunky dialogue, and schmaltzy music.

** out of ****
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Marvel's Much-Maligned Mallard
7 July 2004
At a time when most of Marvel Comics' characters were stuck in low budget TV and straight-to-video productions, Steve Gerber's relatively obscure Howard the Duck got the big budget treatment with none other than George Lucas as producer. The film was written by Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz, who co-wrote "American Graffiti" and "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom", and directed by Huyck, with special effects by ILM. What could go wrong?

A lot, apparently. "Howard" was a critical and financial failure that deep-sixed the careers of Huyck and Katz and led to the cancellation of the duck's magazine. If the film had a moderately priced budget, it might have been forgotten as just another lightweight, trashy 1980s comedy and even turned a profit. Instead, the budget somehow ballooned to a then staggering $37,000,000 (almost as much as the entire "Star Wars" trilogy cost to make). Although other films lost more money and got worse reviews, the name "Howard the Duck" is still synonymous with "expensive turkey".

That said, the movie itself isn't as bad as it's reputation suggests. The plot revolves around the title character (voice by Chip Zien, played by various midgets in animatronic duck suits), a sarcastic talking duck from a planet a lot like Earth, except ducks evolved into the dominant life form. Howard is brought to Cleveland, Ohio when an experimental laser beam opens an interdimensional portal. There he befriends an aspiring rock singer (Leah Thompson) and a kooky lab assistant (Tim Robbins), and comes into conflict with various lowlifes, the police, and an evil demon that has possessed the body of a helpful scientist (Jeffrey Jones), all the while trying to get back home.

Gerber's original comic book series and a subsequent adult-oriented magazine weren't kids' stuff. They juxtaposed a funny animal character with bizarre villains and action more typical of Marvel's super-hero books, usually parodying comics, politics, and popular culture in the process. A sexual relationship between Howard and his human girlfriend Beverly was more than just implied. The "Howard the Duck" movie could have either toned down the more adult situations to create a family-friendly action-comedy, or gone straight for ribald satire and gotten an "R" rating. Instead, the filmmakers sought an uncomfortable middle ground that pleases no one. The script is not witty enough for adults and it is too sleazy and scary for young children. The endless duck puns become tiresome. There are, however, a few truly funny moments, such as Howard's shock at being served eggs, or his observation that "If God intended ducks to fly, he wouldn't have taken away our wings."

The direction is uneven. The reaction of several characters to meeting a talking alien duck seems muted given the circumstances. The special effects are also hit and miss. The animatronic duck suit cost millions, but the actors inside it add little personality. They could have at least waddled when they walked. The demonic Dark Lords of the Universe at the end of the film are portrayed with stop motion animation that is jerky and unrealistic even for the time (perhaps this was intentional, though, to provide a B-movie feel). However, while a bad movie all around, "Howard the Duck" at least stands out for its unique premise. Amidst a sea of formulaic mediocrity, an original idea, even if it's poorly developed, counts for something.

** out ****
82 out of 121 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Devil Must Have Made Them Do It
26 June 2004
Unbelievably bad sequel to the creepy but somewhat overrated horror classic "The Exorcist" is all the more baffling because of the colossal waste of talent involved. "Exorcist" author William Peter Blatty had nothing to do with the story for "Exorcist II" (he would later adapt his sequel novel "Legion" as 1990's "Exorcist III", which, despite studio interference, is a more palatable follow-up). Set four years after the original, "Exorcist II" features a psychologist (Louise Fletcher) probing the repressed memories of Regan (Linda Blair), who had once been possessed by a demon. Regan and the psychologist are sought out by a self-doubting priest (Richard Burton) investigating the death of exorcist Father Merrin (Max von Sydow), and it is discovered that there is still a lingering evil inside Regan.

On paper, "Exorcist II" sounds okay. It has a cast of good actors (Sydow returns in a series of flashbacks, and James Earl Jones and Ned Beatty make brief appearances), music by Enno Morricone, and was directed by John Boorman, but all around this is a low point in the careers of everyone involved. Things quickly go off the rails. Boorman's direction mirrors less the primal terror and moral conflict of his "Deliverance" and more the absurd pretentiousness and unintended humour of his "Zardoz". There are ridiculous plot points involving a mind-reading machine called a "synchronizer", a trip to Africa that mostly takes place on a fake-looking studio set, James Earl Jones wearing a locust costume, and a demonic doppleganger of Regan vamping it up in a negligee. It all builds towards an ending that is confusing, noisy, and anti-climactic.

This is one of those films that makes you ask, "What the hell were they were thinking?". The "Exorcist" franchise has been horribly managed by the studio (as seen with the current status of the prequel in development) and this is one of the worst sequels ever. They should just re-edit and re-title "Exorcist III" and pretend "Exorcist II" never existed.

*1/2 out of ****
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
3/10
The Most Overrated Film of the Decade
31 May 2004
Baz Luhrman's frenetic "Moulin Rouge!" is one of those films that people either love or hate. I have to go with the latter. This is the epitome of a generation of MTV-style filmmaking: the movie is little more than one long, exhausting music video. There is very little substance amongst all the stylistic excess. The characters are all cartoonish stereotypes and the plot is formulaic. The comedic aspects of the film are very broad and not very funny. I found John Leguizamo's portrayal of diminutive painter Toulouse Latrec particularly annoying. The film's message is basically about the power of love (or "wuv", as half the characters in the movie seem to pronounce it), but the love portrayed here is shallow.

There is no subtlety or pacing in this film. Everything is done to the extreme. "Moulin Rouge!" could be diagnosed with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. I became annoyed with the unnecessary camera movements and fast-paced editing. During one scene, I counted 45 cuts within one minute of screentime! Meanwhile, the soundtrack is a bizarre medley of modern pop/rock hits and songs from old movie musicals. This concept is novel, but the novelty soon wears off. While I must give a tip of the hat to any film that tries something different in this age of cinematic mediocrity, watching "Moulin Rouge!" is equivalent to eating cotton candy: it's colourful and gives you a quick buzz, but you soon get sick of it.

Rating: ** out of ****
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hellboy (2004)
Give 'em Hell, boy!
24 April 2004
I had low expectations when I heard they were making a live action movie based on artist/writer Mike Mignola's comic book "Hellboy". Hollywood has a history of turning great comics into lousy movies (i.e. "Howard the Duck", "Swamp Thing", and "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"). However, I was pleasantly surprised that director Guillermo del Toro stuck to the original vision of Mignola, who also served as an executive producer and designer for the film.

For those unfamiliar with the title character, he's an otherdimensional demon brought to Earth as an infant by the undead Russian mystic Rasputin (Karl Roden) and Nazi occultists near the end of World War II. Hellboy, as the baby demon is named by the American soldiers who found him, is raised to adulthood by the fatherly Professor Broom (John Hurt) and becomes a covert government monster-fighter for the Bureau of Paranormal Research and Defense. The adult Hellboy (Ron Perlman, under a ton of make-up) is aided by his pyrokinetic former flame Liz Sherman (Selma Blair), the mentally-advanced fish-man Abe Sapien (voice of David Hyde-Pierce), and ordinary human Agent Myers (Rupert Evans) as they fight to stop a monstrous demon freed by the resurrected Rasputin and his Nazi cohorts and a grander scheme to unleash the Seven Gods of Chaos.

Does that all make sense? Not really, but "Hellboy" is a joyous grab-bag of the horror, adventure, super-hero, and - yes - romantic-comedy genres that riffs on the familiar to create its own weird groove. It's like H.P. Lovecraft, Jack Kirby, George Lucas, Nora Ephron, and Matt Groening got together and wrote a script. This is the kind of movie that builds a cult following while leaving other viewers scratching their heads.

I admire that del Toro cast a group of actors that may not be expensive A-list stars, but are right for their roles. Leading the pack is Perlman, who seems to know this is his chance to shine and gives it his all. Perlman's Hellboy is a wisecracking tough guy on the outside and sweetly vulnerable on the inside. He smokes cigars, writes love letters, grinds down his horns so he can "fit in", and likes cats. Thank goodness they used an actor in make-up to play Hellboy, as opposed to the computer-generated cartoon we got in "Hulk".

"Hellboy" has its faults. Some of the stunts and special effects look fake, the mystical mumbo-jumbo gets confusing, and the film might be too scary, silly, or just plain strange for some audiences. However, like all good films of this type, I was able to suspend my disbelief, sit back, and enjoy the ride. "Hellboy" doesn't take its offbeat premise too seriously, but doesn't descend into camp either. How could I not like a movie that features a crimson-hued demon with a big stone fist as the leading man, and then manages to work Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds' "Red Right Hand" into the soundtrack?

8 out of 10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Total Piece of Cap
27 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Captain America is one of the classic comic book superheroes, but he hasn't fared well on the screen. There was a serial in the 1940s, two made-for-TV movies in the 1970s, and this straight-to-video feature in 1991.

All of these productions were made on the cheap and look it. They also strayed considerably from the comic. This one is a little more faithful than the others. Cap is still Steve Rogers, a 98 lbs weakling transformed into a patriotic hero by the Super Soldier Serum. He wears a red, white, and blue costume and carries a round shield that can be thrown like a cross between a giant frisbee and a boomerang. He is frozen in ice during World War II and awaken from suspended animation in the present day, where he continues his fight against his archenemy, the Red Skull.

That part they got right. Here's what they got wrong. (SPOILERS AHEAD!)Instead of being the frightening symbol of Nazi Germany, the Skull is an orphaned Italian boy transformed into a disfigured, adult blackshirt by fascist experiments. This is stupid since the Italians were the laughingstocks of WWII and inspire ridicule more than fear. The film's latter half is also set in Italy. Was this a condition upon Italian financing? And the Red Skull only looks like his comic book incarnation in the opening WWII sequence. In the present day segments he has had plastic surgery so that his face no longer looks like a red skull. Huh? Maybe they decided to save money on make-up.

Cap's introduction is handled wrong. Despite the close-ups of bulging muscles during the transformation sequence, Steve Rogers (Matt Salinger) looks pretty much like he did before he took the Super Soldier Serum. Rather than being set up as the Living Legend of WWII and disappearing in the war's final days, Cap gets into one fight with the Skull and loses. The Skull ties Cap to a rocket and launches it towards the White House. Cap manages to break free and alter the rocket's destination so he crashes in the Arctic instead. A young boy photographs the whole thing and is thoroughly impressed. But rather than tell his parents, the press, or the authorities he puts the photo up on his wall and goes back to bed. The kid later grows up to become the President of the United States (Ronny Cox) and Cap saves him before the Skull can replace his brain. How nice of Cap, considering the kid FORGOT ABOUT HIM AND LEFT HIM TO FREEZE IN THE ARCTIC!!!

This film has some familiar actors in mostly cameo appearances. You wonder what they paid Cox, Ned Beatty, Michael Nouri, Bill Mumy, and others to appear in this dreck. The leads are no-names. Matt "Yes, I'm J.D.'s son" Salinger is bland and blonde. Cap never had much of a personality and Salinger unfortunately doesn't bring much of his own to the role. There's a little bit of pathos when Cap struggles, Rip Van Winkle-style, to adjust to his young sweetheart now being an elderly grandmother. He then gets involved with her vapid, annoying granddaughter, which is kind of creepy. Scott Paulin plays the Skull like a cross between a Mafioso and a James Bond villain. Competent, but nothing special.

"Captain America" represents the worst of comic book adaptations. The production values are shoddy. Cap's mask has rubber ears when he is at least in costume. For much of the film he's in street clothes. The music seems borrowed from the studio's archives. There is no moving score like in "Superman" or "Batman". The screenplay is no better than a comic script from the 1940s. Comic book fans will be bitterly disappointed and mainstream audiences will only find it entertaining for the camp value.

*1/2 out of ****.
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Somebody's Done It Better, But Still Okay
16 August 2003
The tenth James Bond film is a decent if formulaic actioneer that is one of Roger Moore's better outings in the role. Agent OO7 teams up with a beautiful KGB agent (Barbara Bach) to track down missing British and Soviet nuclear submarines. The trail eventually leads to an ocean-obsessed shipping magnate (Curt Jurgens) who plans to destroy the surface world and build an undersea kingdom.

The plot of "The Spy Who Loved Me" is very similar to "You Only Live Twice", with the bad guys hijacking subs instead of space capsules as part of a plot to heat up the Cold War. The pre-credit ski chase is reminiscent of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and a fight on a train is like the one in "Live and Let Die", which itself was a rip-off of "From Russia With Love". Basically, you won't find originality in TSWLM. It does what it does quite well though.

I've never been a big fan of Roger Moore. I always thought he was the worst Bond. However, here he's not only tolerable but quite good actually. He doesn't look too old, he handles himself in the action sequences, and he occasionally gets to show some depth. Like many a Bond Girl before and since, Barbara Bach looks good but she sure wasn't cast for her acting prowess. Richard Kiel inspires fear as the giant, steel-toothed assassin Jaws (a role he would reprise in the abysmal follow-up "Moonraker"), although his seeming invincibility strains belief and turns into a running gag. Curt Jurgens' head villain is yet another pale imitation of Blofeld and Goldfinger.

TSWLM boasts big sets, big action, and nifty gadgets -- including a car that turns into a submarine. It isn't too campy either. On the minus side, the disco-influenced score is dated, as is Bond's garish yellow and red ski suit. You can do better (I recommend "From Russia With Love", "Goldfinger", and "On Her Majesty's Secret Service"), but you can also do much worse.

*** out of ****
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Man Friday (1975)
4/10
Man Overboard!
4 August 2003
This is one of those films with an intriguing concept that is ruined by poor execution. "Man Friday" is a revisionist take on the classic novel "Robinson Crusoe" told from the point of view of the castaway Englishman Crusoe's (Peter O'Toole) native companion/servant Friday (Richard Roundtree). Adapted from a stage play, this is basically a two-hander carried by O'Toole and Roundtree's performances. The duo's evolving relationship is obviously a metaphor for racism, slavery, colonialism, and capitalism. That part of the film works well, with Crusoe's more "civilized" Christian and English ways revealed as irrational and unnatural. The problem is that the filmmakers add all sorts of other nonsense, perhaps to broaden the film's appeal. Friday often breaks into his "native" songs, but he sings the lyrics in English and the music sounds too contemporary. There is a comical talking parrot. Worst of all is a sequence where Crusoe and Friday try to escape from the island by inventing all sorts of silly flying machines, with accompanying sound effects borrowed from an old "Roadrunner" cartoon. There are also some plotting problems. Crusoe is not properly introduced and Friday goes from being terrified of Crusoe to amiably calling him "master" way too quickly. Since director Jack Gold can't decide if this is a serious drama or a musical-comedy-adventure, it doesn't succeed as either.

4 out of 10.
15 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hulk (2003)
Hulk (Not A) Smash!
23 June 2003
Talented director Ang Lee tries to modernize and bring added complexity to this big-budget adaptation of the iconic green-skinned giant, best known from his long-running Marvel comic book and the rather cheesey TV series. However, while Lee's intentions are good he bogs down the character with an overly convoluted, plodding, and revisionist origin.

In Lee's version orphan Bruce Banner is adopted as a child and grows up to become emotionally pent-up scientist Bruce Krensler (Eric Bana). While working with his ex-girlfriend Betty Ross (Jennifer Connelly) on a process to increase human strength and healing using gamma rays and "nanomeds", Bruce is accidentally exposed to a potentially fatal dose of both. Instead of killing him though, they react with a genetic mutation Bruce inherited from his long-lost geneticist father David Banner (Nick Nolte) and psychological trauma caused by repressed childhood memories to transform him into the monstrous Hulk when angry. Bruce is then hunted by Betty's estranged father, General "Thunderbolt" Ross (Sam Elliot), greedy soldier turned entrepreneur Glen Talbot (Josh Lucas), and his own dad, recently released from a mental institution. Each wants to exploit the Hulk's powers for their own ends.

As originally created by writer Stan Lee and artist Jack Kirby, the Hulk was always a tragic monster inspired by "Frankenstein", "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde", and "King Kong" rather than a conventional super-hero. Fittingly, Ang Lee's "Hulk" resembles a sci-fi creature feature more than it does "Spider-Man". However, the story by James Schamus makes the rather straightforward character much more complicated than he needs to be and drags on for about a half-hour too long. Lee doesn't help things by overindulging in distracting cinematic trickery like split-screens, zooms, and wipes and the hoary old narrative devices of dream sequences and flashbacks (and sometimes dream sequences within flashbacks!).

As many people have already commented, the CGI Hulk created by ILM is not entirely convincing. As for myself, I was able to suspend my disbelief while the leaping, super-strong Hulk was battling the U.S. military or a pack of mutated dogs. However, the filmmakers make the mistake of portraying the Hulk as too powerful. Like Superman without Kryptonite, an invincible hero quickly becomes boring.

I thought the picture was well cast up until Nolte goes off the deep end and turns into a knock-off of the old comic book villain the Absorbing Man. Ironically, while Lee and Schamus strive to give the Hulk more depth, they end up stripping him of his personality. In the comic book, the Hulk had the mind of a five-year old, the grammar of a caveman (sample dialogue: "Hulk smash!"), and sympathy towards children, animals, and other helpless innocents. In the movie, the Hulk only speaks in a dream sequence, outwits the army, and is just a big angry guy who trashes everything until the presence of Betty calms him down. And while I'm glad that "Hulk" avoids the campiness of some comic book-to-movie adaptations, it is so deadly serious it lacks all sense of humour or fun. Instead the laughs are unintentional, like when a logical explanation is provided for the ever-changing size of the Hulk, but not the ever-changing size of his shorts.

All in all, "Hulk" is better than most comic book movies, but it is too flawed to be a fully satisfying moviegoing experience.

6 out of 10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Beginning of the Series' Long Decline
19 June 2003
After George Lazenby got a lukewarm reception as James Bond in 1969's "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and he backed out of a seven year contract to play the character, the search was on again for a new 007. The producers eventually convinced the original and greatest Bond, Sean Connery, to return one more time for 1971's "Diamonds Are Forever" (Connery would play Bond for the last time in 1984's "Never Say Never Again", a thinly veiled remake of "Thunderball", for another studio) before handing over the franchise to Roger Moore.

That said, "Diamonds Are Forever" is definitely the weakest of the original Bond films starring Connery. Agent 007 hooks up with a ditzy smuggler (Jill St. John) as he links stolen diamonds to a plot by SPECTRE leader Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Charles Gray) to build an orbiting space laser.

Many Bond fans dismissed Lazenby and anything to do with OHMSS. Apparently, so did the makers of this movie. How much better this film would have been if it was about Bond getting personal revenge against Blofeld for what happened in OHMSS (those who have seen OHMSS know what I am referring to). Unfortunately, there is no reference at all to the events in the previous picture, and the plot follows the basic "evil villain holds world ransom with super weapon" formula instead.

Connery's still the best Bond and knows how to make an entrance, but he looks noticeably older and less engaged than in his earlier efforts. OHMSS had a smart, classy, and capable "Bond Girl" in Diana Rigg's Tracy. "Diamonds Are Forever" has an annoying and bumbling Jill St. John as Tiffany Case and Lana Wood in a blink-and-you'll-miss-her walk-on as the aptly named Plenty O'Toole. Also appearing in the film are two agile female guards named Bambi and Thumper (I wonder what the folks at Disney thought?) and a pair of ambiguously gay assassins. Charles Gray is a strangely effeminate Blofeld (he even dresses in drag at one point) who lacks the bald head, as well as the diabolical menace, of Donald Pleasence or Telly Salvalas.

Since the story is weak and formulaic, "Diamonds Are Forever" instead relies on the same campy jokes and pointless chase sequences that would later plague the Roger Moore era. It should also be noted that this was the last of the "official" Bond films that could feature SPECTRE due to complex copyright reasons, although an unnamed figure who was obviously supposed to be Blofeld appears in the opening of 1981's "For Your Eyes Only".

6 out of 10.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Kirk and Spock Save the Whales!
18 June 2003
The fourth installment of the long running movie franchise based on the original 1960s TV show is different, but good. "Star Trek IV" is an example of the "fish out of water" comedies popular in the 1980s (humour derived by putting characters in unfamiliar locales - such as in "Crocodile Dundee" and "Down and Out in Beverly Hills"). This makes "Star Trek IV" unlike the other films in the series, but it works because "Star Trek" was always about ideas and characters instead of action sequences and special effects and also because the jokes are actually funny.

"Star Trek IV's" plot is pure contrivance. After angering both Starfleet and the Klingons because of their actions in "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock", Adm. James T. Kirk (William Shatner) and his officers prepare to return to Earth and face the music. However, before arriving home they learn that a mysterious, energy-draining probe is threatening to destroy the world unless it can communicate with the humpback whales it has been sent to find. Since whales are extinct in the 23rd century, Kirk and company go back in time to 1985 San Francisco to retrieve some.

The whole bit with the alien probe is kind of a rip off of the first "Star Trek" picture (which itself borrowed heavily from a couple of old TV episodes), but that's not really the focus of the film. Instead it's the time travel, comedic, and environmentalist elements. As directed by Mr. Spock himself, Leonard Nimoy, "Star Trek IV" strikes the right tone of light hearted fun without becoming too campy. While it does become a little too preachy at times (especially from Catherine Hicks as a marine biologist Kirk befriends), it's hard not to like this goofy sci-fi lark that nicely exploits the cast's encounters with 20th century culture and technology.

7 out of 10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Superman III (1983)
2/10
The Man of Steel Gets Rusty
14 June 2003
At some point during "Superman III", a little boy tells a strangely out of character Superman that he's "just in a slump". Audiences will probably say the same thing. After really enjoying the first two "Superman" movies, "Superman III" comes as a big disappointment. As directed by "Superman II's" Richard Lester, it makes a misguided turn towards campy comedy, while the screenplay by David and Leslie Newman simply serves as a vehicle for two popular icons of the early 1980s: comedian Richard Pryor and the computer.

Pryor plays an otherwise ordinary man who discovers an uncanny talent for computer programming. He's recruited by an unscrupulous industrialist (Robert Vaughn) to aid plans to dominate the world's economy. At the same time, Clark Kent (Christopher Reeve) visits his hometown of Smallville and is reunited with his high school crush Lana Lang (Annette O'Toole). When Superman interferes in the bad guys' schemes, they attempt to synthesize Kryptonite to destroy him, but they get the formula wrong and the resulting compound instead alters the Man of Steel's personality (much like the Red Kryptonite from the old comic books did).

"Superman III" goes wrong on many different levels. Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor is absent and Margot Kidder's Lois Lane only has a cameo. Vaughn's okay, but Annie Ross is one dimensional as his haggish sister and Pamela Stephenson is annoying as a "psychic nutritionist" who may not be the blonde bimbo she appears to be. As for Pryor, he's simply miscast and has no place being in a "Superman" picture. Pryor's racy stand up act usually gets toned down for film and here he's reduced to silly pratfalls. I wouldn't have minded the greater emphasis on comedy if most of the jokes were funny (watch "Star Trek IV" as an example of how to do it right), but much of the humour in "Superman III" is forced and out of place. An opening sequence involving a slapstick chain of accidents belongs in a "Keystone Kops" episode.

"Superman III" does have a few saving graces. Christopher Reeve gives another good performance as the title character, even when the script lets him down. Reeve is also convincing portraying Superman's evil split personality. I don't want to give the movie's high point away, but there's a technically impressive fight sequence in a junkyard that brings a touch of darkness and psychological complexity to a movie otherwise lacking in it. O'Toole also provides a pleasant alternative love interest for the Man of Steel. Just like in the comics, Lana prefers Clark as he is while Lois only had eyes for Superman. There are also some decent action sequences, like when Superman puts out a chemical plant fire, but I found the climactic fight against the villains' giant super-computer to be nothing more than an ad for an Atari video game. Unfortunately for all, "Superman III" marked the beginning of the end for a once great movie franchise.

3 out of 10.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Superman II (1980)
7/10
A Super Sequel
14 June 2003
Before the "Superman" franchise went completely to hell with the third and fourth installments and the spin-off "Supergirl", there was this fitting follow-up. "Superman II" picks up where the original movie left off and brings back most of the original cast (the notable exception is Marlon Brando, whose scenes as Jor-El were cut by the producers to avoid paying him royalties). Since "Superman II" doesn't have to go through all the exposition that the first film had to it is shorter, faster paced, and has more action.

Superman (Christopher Reeve) renounces his powers for the love of Lois Lane (Margot Kidder) after she discovers his secret identity. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor (Gene Hackman) escapes from prison and joins forces with three Kryptonian criminals (Terence Stamp, Sarah Douglas, and Jack O'Halloran) accidentally freed from the Phantom Zone by the Man of Steel. Superman must somehow regain his abilities when the evil Kryptonians conquer America.

"Superman II" boasts some wonderfully over the top action sequences. It's like a comic book come to life. Because he's so powerful, Superman needs big challenges in order to be an interesting character. It's a stroke of genius to pit Superman against three bad guys who all have his powers, forcing Supes to rely on his brains and courage instead of brawn. The villains are great, particularly Stamp's power hungry General Zod.

But what also makes this film work is the surprisingly touching and bittersweet love story. Superman is torn between his love for one woman and his duty to protect the entire world. His final decision is heartbreaking but understandable. "Superman II" does have some flaws , including numerous plot holes, shameless product placements, and the injection of some silly comedic bits that foreshadow the campy disaster that was "Superman III". Overall, though, it is a fun fantasy film with spirited characters and a witty script.

7 out of 10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The Most Overlooked Bond Film is Also One of the Best
14 June 2003
"On Her Majesty's Secret Service" is the most overlooked Bond movie, perhaps due to its disappointing box office upon its initial release and the fact that its star, George Lazenby, had the unenviable task of replacing Sean Connery and then backed out of the series after only one picture. Many retrospectives give it short thrift and it rarely appears on TV. That said, OHMSS has developed a cult following over the years and is also one of the best films in the series in my opinion, ranking only behind "Goldfinger" and "From Russia With Love".

Agent OO7 romances a troubled contessa (Diana Rigg) whose father (Gabrielle Frezetti) is a Corsican crime lord with information regarding fugitive SPECTRE chief Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Telly Salvalas). Bond then goes undercover in Blofeld's hideout, a mountaintop Swiss allergy clinic, and exposes a plot to contaminate the world's food supply.

After the outlandish spacejackings and volcanic lairs of 1967's "You Only Live Twice", this was a return to the basics for the Bond franchise. OHMSS boasts frenetic but realistic action sequences and tons of suspense, while the hi-tech gadgets and cheesey jokes are kept to a minimum. Lazenby lacks Connery's acting ability and charisma, but he has chiseled good looks, is believable in the action sequences, and manages to play a more human and sensitive OO7 than Connery ever did (as opposed to being invincible, Bond actually looks SCARED when he's cornered by the bad guys!). At the core of the picture is the only genuine love story in the franchise's history. Rigg is a classy and capable "Bond Girl" who brings out Bond's tender side. Meanwhile, Salvalas provides a Blofeld who is both mentally AND physically menacing, unlike "You Only Live Twice's" diminutive Donald Pleasence (the inspiration for "Austin Powers'" Dr. Evil) and "Diamonds Are Forever's" strangely effiminate Charles Gray.

Most people already know how OHMSS' ending is a classic piece of Bond lore. For those who don't, let's just say it's unique in the series and represents the last time the franchise had any creative spark before descending into decades of self-homage at best and self-parody at worst. In the 34 years since OHMSS' release 13 more Bond films have been released, but none of them have mattered.

8 out of 10.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Jurassic Park - The Ride: The Movie
22 July 2001
PLOT: Things go wrong as paleontologists are conned by couple into helping them find their missing son, trapped amongst dinosaurs on restricted island.

REVIEW: Third installment of the lucrative, entertaining, but creatively limp film franchise is not nearly as good as the first movie, but a slight improvement over the second. Sam Niell, who deserves to be a bigger star than he is, is the film's anchor as he returns as paleontologist and reluctant action hero Dr. Alan Grant. William H. Macy and Alessandro Nivola also give good performances, although this film really doesn't have anything in the way of character development. As directed by Joe Johnston, "Jurassic Park III" is as efficient and effective as a Raptor attack, cramming a lot of thrills, laughs, and wonders into the 90 minute running time. The victim of constant script revisions, the story seems to have been left behind in previous drafts and on the editing room floor, but the shallow plot serves well as a gateway into a prehistoric world, filled with new and intriguing dinosaurs, without any pretense. I was left wanting more, and this movie deserves a "special edition" with extra footage, but that is probably better than wanting less. The film also scores points for parodying movies of this type, and is a shameless example of cinema as amusement park ride in its purest form, although the finale chickens out in the end. A simple, good ol' fashioned matinee monster movie, but you won't be left with much to ponder on the way out of the theatre.
11 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed