Reviews

If someone is trying to convince you that figure skating is a beautiful and wondrous sport, but you'd rather be watching either cartoons or Jodorowsky, sit down together and watch "Strawberry Ice".

Tell them it stars one of Canada's skating legends (Toller Cranston) and features several professional champions/Olympians.

Don't tell them it boasts the best special effects that 1982 Canadian television has to offer.

Tell them it's one of those skating specials - almost no dialogue, just the skating to tell the story of one person's wandering through their own dreamland.

Don't tell them about the calypso music. Or the gang fight. Or the space vortexes. Or the skating in Hell.

Tell them you don't know why it's called Strawberry Ice.

Don't tell them that watching to the end will not get you any closer to the answer of why it's called Strawberry Ice.

This skating special feels like a televised hallucination, but it is never boring. It doesn't slow down so it can be judged on technical difficulty, or elaborate on whatever the plot is supposed to be.

It's a wild visual experience that's best when it's shared, so someone can verify that you saw what you think you saw. The three times I've seen it so far, several folks and I riffed it, and laughed, and marveled, and were extremely confused... and I think we'll all be back for its re-broadcast.

It's not exactly "The Wild Bunch" or "Saving Private Ryan", but it's still the story of a lone battalion, on their last detail, finding a reason to fight one more time. They get drafted, they find out they're not the good guys, they find the good fight to fight, leading to the big showdown at an abandoned outpost, against impossible odds...

Not a movie I'd recommend my kids to watch for school credit. It's a re-imagining of the Arthur myth, like Burton's "Planet of the Apes." But the movie uses the legend to dress up the American chestnut of the imperialist soldier discovers the half of his heart that ties him to the land, uniting a fractured people against the forces that threaten to obliterate. It's "Dances With Wolves." It's "The Last Samurai". Heck, Merlin's a Wiccan shaman that anoints Arthur king of the Britons! All they were missing was a harmonica solo and Gabby Hayes.

Against those standards, "King Arthur" is found wanting. It's missing a couple of scenes to make it a banner addition to the genre, and nothing new to help it escape the limitations. Maybe a couple more scenes with Arthur's knights, to show him through their eyes. Or maybe a couple more solo scenes of the King, to hear his mind trying to contemplate his destiny.

Decent Arthur, decent Gwen, great villains, underused knights, laughable 'natives', one cool fight in four - add up to a half-great movie. Five of ten.

As road trip movies go, it's subtle and (perhaps too) familiar. Joe (no last name) decides to honor a stranger's last request, and deliver his ashes to an oasis in Nevada. Along the way he discovers the citizens of Today's America: the rebels whose time has passed, the franchise minimum-wagers, the common people in their varying degrees of lunacy... As he drives farther and farther from his old life, the purpose of his trip morphs into a larger exploration of the journey that everyone makes, the journey of life... John Doe's "Joe" pulls off the everyman bit, the straight man for everyone else to prosletyze to and joke around. His only job in the movie seems to be the audience's advocate, reflecting their reactions to the strangeness in the desert. Adam Horowitz's "Sam" is more than the lively sidekick; he represents the end result of being raised in modern times. A pathological liar, a pyro and a lemming, he's the motherless child that considers every location of the Motel 9 franchise his home. Overall, the movie feels as staged as an above-average Afterschool Special. The cameos feel like stunts (Mike Tyson's appearance in CROCODILE DUNDEE IN LA was more believable) and the intentions are so clear from the beginning that the trip seems redundant. And the point? It would seem to be as Sir Edmund Hilary reasoned for climbing Everest; "because it's there."

As a road trip, it's more a pleasant afternoon than the journey of a million miles. 5/10 stars

I have to take issue with everybody whining about the weak plot, for two basic reasons:

1) This is an action movie, in the vein of ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST and DRUNKEN MASTER II. Were you expecting THE USUAL SUSPECTS? TRAFFIC? SEVEN SAMURAI? While the structure's not as inventive as PULP FICTION or MEMENTO, there's just enough setup to give room for the action scenes. And while the characters may not be as nuanced as OCEAN'S ELEVEN or JACKIE BROWN, they're still memorable and sympathetic enough to add genuine weight to the faceoffs (as opposed to, say, XXX or SWORDFISH).

2)SPOILERS: Okay, here's the plot: Once upon a time in Mexico, where everyone is out for themselves, and everyone uses everyone else, Agent Sands (Depp) is the king of the game. He knows who wants to kill who, and sets them in a row to kill each other off and keeps things as they are. The General kills the President, the Mariachi kills the General, the drug lord kills the Mariachi, the ex-Fed kills the drug lord, and everybody's happy and dead -- that's the plan. Of course, nothing goes as planned.

Now, I could go on about the death and rebirth of the Sands character, and his parallels with Saul's trip to Damascus; I could compare the arguments of redemption versus revenge as exemplified by Mr Good, Mr Bad, and Mr Ugly along with several ancillary characters; I could even prattle about the satirical elements addressing the political situations of Central America... or I could just write Santa for an Agent Sands action figure.

Bottom line, if your only complaint about the film is that the plot seemed confusing and less than substantial, watch it again! MEXICO is a classic: 9/10

Sure, it's a really, really CHEAP version. "The Matrix" is the pinnacle of millenial cinematic technology, casting some of the world's most recognizable stars. "They Live" looks like it was filmed for television circa 1982, and its stars are a professional wrestler and a dude who used to live in Mr Rogers Neighborhood -- in the land of make-believe. But if you've ever dug Chuck Norris movies, or anything with "Kickboxing" in the title, "They Live" will feel like a freakin' treatise.

Honestly, the parallels are there. Is Roddy Piper's character, Nada, any more reticent and mysterious than Keanu Reeves' Neo? If anything, Nada seems more charming, and definitely more human. There's the mysterious glimpses and glitches into a world that exists among our world, akin to the parable of Plato's cave; a scrappy but armed underground contingent whose ultimate goal is to return awareness to the human race; a malevolent alien force that sates mankind into complacency while it uses humanity for its nourishment; the sublimination, the betrayals, the humor amid the chaos...

For me, 80's B-grade action is a genre, like French comedies and Woody Allen films; in this context, "They Live" is a capable film, though not strong enough to transcend its conventions. It's a working class action film, with the catchy bon mots and gratuitous explosions that you crave from these films.

I can think of two distinct advantages that "They Live" has over "The Matrix": -the alley fight between Nada and Frank is a more powerful struggle for me than all the wire work of all 3 Matrix films. -"They Live" only took an hour and a half of my life. rating: 6/10

first, don't watch the trailer. it shows the end of the movie.

second, I think the comparisons to Lynch are dangerous, especially when Lynch has already made a movie about a guy who feels disconnected with his wife and the love they used to have, about a guy who finds himself down a bloody path, about a guy who finds himself in a really bad dream, indistinguishable from his reality...

Okay, I'll just say it straight out: Chasing Sleep is a farm-league Lost Highway. If you know someone who likes creepy psychological movies, but couldn't dig Lost Highway, they'll probably like Chasing Sleep. Spells out the main character's situation a bit more plainly. That's because the setting's plainer (the entire movie's in the man's house, a lifeless six-figure suburban hovel), the characters are plainer (especially against Lynch characters), and the plot is a lot simpler -- almost predictable.

There's a couple of familiar faces for TV junkies, but this movie rests squarely on Jeff Daniels' shoulders. He does alright as an Everyman on the breaking point; at least, I believed that he was spiritually exhausted throughout the picture. Given the story's setup and flavor, I think the hollowness of the other performances are intentional, avoiding the intimacy that might break this spell of solitude on the main character. Or the actors might have just had too little to work with.

Conclusions? the movie's slightly clever, some intriguing shots, still haven't figured out about the baby... But I can't watch this without thinking about Lost Highway, Vanilla Sky (Abre Los Ojos), or Dr Caligari, and what's already been done. Still, good enough for cable...

*SPOILERS* (don't worry, I'll try not to reveal anything from the last ten minutes...)

Denzel's in too familiar territory here; he plays the same cop he's played before, which feels off in this particular world the movie's in.

John Goodman, on the other hand, is a perfect fit, as are most of the supporting cast.

Without an Award-Winning bad guy for Denzel to play off, Denzel has to muster the menace himself, from his reactions. He doesn't do bad, but there are a few moments you feel like he's in front of a blue-screen...

The hardest part were the logical lapses. If any readers got an explanation, please let me know WHY AZAZEL'S NOT ABLE TO TRANSFER IN THE BEGINNING OF THE MOVIE, BUT DENZEL'S WORRIED ABOUT IT FOR THE REST OF THE MOVIE? HE COULD HAVE STRANGLED THE GUY WITH HIS BARE HANDS, STUFFED HIM IN THE TRUNK, AND WAITED IT OUT! WHAT DID I MISS?

On a related note, the demon's motivation did seem murky, as well as the discussion on man's purpose. was the demon letting Denzel know who he really was to drive him nuts, and make him a patsy, thereby creating the chaotic pattern (now that's an oxymoron) he started 30 years ago? and how come he didn't put together who the daugther/ religous expert was?

Ah, it's stuff like this that got in the way. This just made me long for "Wicker Man". Still, as an entry in the cop-vs-the Apocolypse subgenre, not bad. As an entry in the Denzel-as-cop, about as good as "Virtuousity".

Let's call "Fallen" a rental, and leave it at that...