Change Your Image
joesmith2007
Reviews
Billable Hours (2006)
Urban intelligentsia
Well, yes, agreed (with jesse-26) it *is* good for a few laughs. But to claim that "... only certain people can appreciate..." (it), as jesse-26 did -- um, isn't that comment a bit self-righteous? Isn't that comment a bit, um, typically ...
... Toronto?
I mean, that's the attitude of Toronto's intelligentsia. That they're sooooooo far above the rest of us (Toronto being the "center of the universe", of course), and that the rest of us -- especially red-states and blue-provincers -- could not possibly understand these deep intellectual ramifications.
Because, after all, given we don't have Master's degrees and PhD's, since, if we did, we'd live in civilized places like Toronto or Boston, etc.
And, "...if you respect the characters you'll really get the humour..." -- again, more of the left-wing, high-brow, intelligentsia "holier-than-thou" Toronto thinking that really burns my butt.
Other than that, I love the musical scoring in Billable Hours; top-notch.
The Ugly American (1963)
Brando and an allegory
Naiveté and simplicity are not the hallmarks of this wonderful cinematic masterpiece, as other commentators would have you believe. Instead, this film presents a 40 year old allegory of everything that America is doing wrong today. One becomes 'gelé' as each morsel of film unrolls and presents us with chilling portents of what is to become of American foreign policy, today, in the 21st century.
I find it almost disturbing that the authors and screen-writers knew -- in 1963 -- that the United States would deteriorate into the war-mongering world-wide dictatorship that it has now become. Every single element portrayed in "The Ugly American" -- from the U.S. military/industrial complex to the quest for phoney 'freedom', to the self-righteous White pitying of the starving and wretched Coloreds, to the supposed fight for 'democracy' -- has become the cause celebré of the red-state revolution, the Republican manifesto.
God help us.
8MM (1999)
Hitchock with an edge
For 40 years directors have been trying to replicate Hitchcock. Schumacher has come close. Those of my generation have been waiting for that void (Hitchcock) to be filled by a worthy protégé; he may've arrived. Having turned two Grisham books into exceptional movies, Schumacher may have what it takes.
Were he to have filmed "8 MM" in black and white, it could have even passed for film noir. The cynicism required of that genre's characters is certainly there (though Cage's in the end spoils it a bit with too much of a "Leave it to Beaver" type finish; I would've ended on a darker note centering on the dissolution of his marriage. Lower camera-angles a-la "The Collector" would've enhanced the fear factor). Chris Bauer's "m-my name's George..." as he lays in the rain in the cemetery at the end, nervously putting on his glasses ... chills are sent up one's spine.
Chills that Hitchcock would have given us. Schumacher, you've got what it takes. Just keeping making more like "8 MM".
Cold Creek Manor (2003)
By the Numbers, I agree
I was so looking forward to Stone and Quaid, both of whom are generally exceptional. Unfortunately, I too was disappointed with this film's predictability. It's one of those: "Shucks, they could have done so much more with the plot development; it has poTENtial", type things. Because it DOES -- while the story starts out fairly predictable and you are ready to throw in the towel, the appearance of the protagonist, and the mystery surrounding his father, give you hope that some very juicy plot twists are about to be presented.
They aren't. And in the end, it becomes a rather paltry waste of Stone and Quaid's talents. I am particularly disappointed that Sharon Stone was given short shrift in her character. Being rather cynical about good-looking blonde actresses, I generally don't watch movies with them, but Ms. Stone is, to me, a refreshing exception. She is a substantial talent and, unfortunately, we do not see enough of her on the big screen (3 years since `Beautiful Joe'). Understandably, then, her name on the marquee of this flick was a big draw to me ... but her rather meagre character in `CCM' made me shake my head. Oh well, better luck next time. I do hope this is a sign that Sharon Stone is about to come back in a major blockbuster a-la `Basic Instinct' (ahh, we can only dream
).
Mrs. Miniver (1942)
Classic Walter Pidgeon
Exceptional British drama. Pro-British war propaganda, but reading betw/lines yields conflict and self-doubt about the righteousness. `Normal English family in the abnormal circumstances of war' - G.Carson is convincing. We see why the best actors really are British (or Canadian), not American. Greer Garson; not only talented but unnervingly beautiful -- still a stunning beauty at 1978 Academy Awards (74 years old). `Why these, why these innocents?', queries the vicar. Ordinary people trying to keep ordinary lives, during the extraordinary: war. Families in Baghdad 2 months ago probably doing same. Think about it.
Ronin (1998)
Brilliant ... and very European.
Brilliant and highly crafted. Some think de Niro was in a 'trough' when he made this film; instead, I feel he is -- quite simply -- exceptional and REAL, as always.
Filming is superb. Cinematography pushes the envelope. Even the sound is well thought-out (note the scraping of the ice skates in the scenes near the end -- and the realistic pistol sounds during the climax in the parking lot, the innocuous "pop-pop"). Car chases right out of "EA Sports" video games (my kids love 'em, so the chases MUST be good, lol. Especially de Niro's parking-brake technique in the Paris chase scene). Locations are delicious; thank you, John Frankenheimer.
And, stellar performances from: * Stellan Skarsgård (quite a contrast from "Good Will Hunting", 1997); * Sean Bean (who first impressed me in "Patriot Games", 1992, and continues to do so); * and, of course, Skipp Sudduth (our beloved 'Sully' from "Third Watch", 1999-).
Sarcastic overlay of base animalism over Europe's sheen of ultra-intelligentsia is especially appreciated. If you've ever spent some time living in Europe (as I have), you'll enjoy whenever a non-European (ie: de Niro's character) brings the stuffed-shirt intellectuals of the 'continent' grinding back down into the dust of reality. Yet the banter in French (w/English sub-titles) near the end between the Michael Lonsdale and Jean Reno characters is exquisitely ... I don't know ... RIGHT. It's better than had it been translated into English.
I wish that Jean Reno could appear in many more English-language films; he is the best from the land of 'vin et fromage' since Gérard Depardieu. An appropriate Gallic partner to the quiet and intelligent American represented by de Niro's character.
Best line: "I once removed a guy's appendix with a grapefruit spoon..." (de Niro's "Sam").
spoiler follows
In the end, we don't care that we never discover the true contents of the silver case. Very John Le Carré, thus; de Niro is today's Richard Burton ("Spy Who Came In from the Cold", 1965), at least in THIS film; t'isn't the plot that counts ... it's the struggle.
Skinwalkers (2002)
A great Who-Dunit!
Movies in sub-cultural settings become exceptional when you quickly forget that it is, in fact, a sub-culture. Within minutes of the opening scenes of "Skinwalkers", I no longer dwelt upon the thought that a murder movie on an Indian Reservation is an unusual setting and, instead, focused on the murder mystery itself. In this sense, it reminds me of "Barbershop" (http://us.imdb.com/Title?0303714) in its ability to portray a particular sub-culture in America without actually dwelling on the differences between that sub-culture and America as a whole.
In other words, these movies become successful when you are drawn into the story so deeply that you realise that the sub-culture is as much a world in its own right as the so-called "majority" of America.
I would love to see this film turned into a weekly series. There's certainly enough potential depth of storylines to allow that.
The Shipping News (2001)
Comfort Food
A warm and subtle weave of how delicious the human experience truly is. All of us at one time or another sit there at the wheel of the car or on the bus and say: is this all there is? Life is boring. R.G. Quoyle takes us on an adventure that shows that we merely have to peel back the layers of complacency and -- lo and behold -- there is wonder below the surface. I was not too keen on the circumstances of how they ended up in Newfoundland (ie: the accident), but Spacey, as always, pulls off the movie's launch -- as nobody else can -- and we rub our hands in glee at the adventure that awaits us on "The Rock".
This movie reminds me a bit of "Fargo". Simplistic desolation (be it Newfoundland or Minnesota) surprises us; we discover that, even in out-of-the-way small towns, the life of so-called "simple" people can, instead, be a complex tapestry worthy of the Naked City. Not everything exciting has to take place in New York.
I loved the cinematography. Newfoundland is incredibly beautiful, even in its "at-first-glance" desolation. The shots along the wind-swept shores, especially near the end, convey the sense of human frailty that Kevin Spacey himself makes so much a part of all his roles (American Beauty being, of course, the penultimate).
Please rent this movie. It isn't just for Spacey fans (of which I'm one), it's for anybody who needs to know that every dark cloud has a silver lining. And, like my title suggests, it's great "comfort food", especially in winter.
Fatal Vision (1984)
Opinions change
When I first saw this movie over 10 years ago, it convinced me of MacDonald's guilt. I saw it again last night and this time I'm not so sure.
This movie is looking more and more like a propaganda film, intended to cement the audience's hatred of MacDonald, and convince the audience that he is, indeed, guilty. That's quite frightening -- what if it's not the only one like this? What if many Hollywood movies are, in fact, propaganda? Isn't that what we accused certain dictators of making over the past 100 century.
After I watched last night's showing, I went to MacDonald's website. Yes, I know, if I'm worried about "propaganda", I have to view his site with skepticism too. And I did. Yet I couldn't help coming to an uneasy conclusion: if MacDonald really is guilty, why is he so willing to have his DNA tested?
After all, if you are guilty of murder -- and knowing that mitochondrial DNA testing is highly accurate today -- you know for a fact that if you agree to DNA testing, you will be caught. Yet MacDonald is willing to go ahead with it. Sorry, but I just can not shirk the nagging feeling that this means he is convinced of his own innocence (notice I said "convinced" -- it may well be that he did indeed commit the murders, but is so horrified about them that they are now part of his repressed memory and he, in fact, believes he did not commit them!).
The other thing that disturbs me is that the North Carolina prosecutors themselves seem very reluctant to allow full DNA testing. For instance, they are willing to allow nuclear DNA (requiring a larger sample size) or mitochondrial DNA testing, but not both.
Why not? Wouldn't you, as a prosecutor, want to exhaust every possible avenue to find a killer? How can there be such a thing as "too much" information when trying to solve a murder? I find this disturbing. In fact, combined with MacDonald's willingness to undergo DNA testing, I find the prosecutors' reluctance to be evidence that they are far less than certain that they convicted the right man for the crime. Perhaps the prosecutors have something to hide?
In conclusion, I must also agree with another writer that perhaps the most perplexing (and disturbing) aspect of this case that alludes to MacDonald's innocence is the apparent lack of motive. There seems to be no financial nor love-triangle motivation for MacDonald to kill his family.
There is a phenomenon known as "family annihilators", men who kill their entire family because they sense impending ruin (usually financial), and feel that their family can not survive without them. In their misguided way, these men believe they are doing their family a favour by killing them, saving them from the misery that follows financial ruin. However, these men invariably break down in court and completely confess to such crimes. MacDonald didn't do that. So that explanation is likely out of the picture for him, especially since the movie does not portray him as facing imminent financial ruin.
Sometime later in 2002 the full mitochondrial DNA test will be performed. Stay tuned; the results will have significant ramifications. If, in fact, the test results cast doubt on MacDonald's guilt, the producers of "Fatal Vision" will have a lot of explaining to do ...
Law & Order (1990)
The "Thinkers" Show
Absolute top-notch television. If you only watch 1 show a week, watch this. I also catch as many of the re-runs as possible on A&E. I'll watch most older episodes again and again, because there's always something new to pick up.
Funny how many other people in my age-group ("boomers") also watch it. Lennie is the quintessential New Yorker -- he almost makes you want to live there! I love how he's always got to groom a newbie; some people don't like how the cast changes frequently, I say: that's how it is in the real working world, for all of us, people come and go. And the writers craft this fluidity into the script, very skillful.
I don't watch a lot of TV (and am rather cynical about most of it) but L&O is an example of the fact that, when TV "works", it works well. Not only do the actors present high-quality and highly credible performances (you really feel this is what cops and DAs are like in the "real" world!), the writers are not afraid to delve into controversial issues and challenging storylines.