Change Your Image
jonathanmhoffman
Reviews
The Thin Red Line (1998)
Pretentious and disappointing
Take a star-studded cast, a plot based on one of the most significant battles of WWII, a book that, by all accounts is terrific, and ruin it with philosophical claptrap, diversions that lengthen the film without adding anything, and making very little use of some of the big name actors. Then bore your audience to death by dragging it on for no good reason, insert gratuitous meaningless junk, like a crocodile we see at the beginning and the end, but we don't know why, and this is what you get.
Booksmart (2019)
Don't Bother
It's supposed to be clever and smart. It was neither. Instead, it's crass, tasteless, cliched and boring. There is a kernel of a story here that at least has the potential to be interesting: the two smart girls who are graduating from high school and haven't ever had any fun, till they go over the top the night before graduation. But if they're so smart, why are they so stupid? Why don't they have any real wit? If the audience can tell in advance exactly what's coming next, why are the "smart girls" so oblivious? How difficult would it have been to make this movie actually funny or clever? Looks like they didn't try very hard. A cascade of F-bombs and v-words isn't all that hilarious, especially when that's all there is. Oh, yeah, they get wet in the pool, too. Ha ha. If you wait to watch it on TV a week or two from now, you'll only be paying slightly more than it's worth.
Long Shot (2019)
Hilarious
I don't know why so many people dislike this movie. We laughed all the way through it. Raunchy but a very fun romcom. I wish Hollywood would make more romcoms again, but stupid high-budget cartoonish Avengers are the thing now. I far prefer this one. Seth Rogan is hilarious, and Charlize is terrific. Made our day
Mr. Skeffington (1944)
An excellent movie. If only...
A heartbreaking story of vanity, greed, and love. It would have been an ever richer experience had it not been censored by the War Department during WW II. The original script was also a commentary about anti-Semitism. Skeffington is a Jew. His beautiful wife,as well as her pre-marital suitors, humiliate Skeffington as the suitors continue to court her, unabated, even after the wedding. Undoubtedly, the anti-Semitism of the era was an element of the disrespect so many of the other characters show toward Skeffington. Yet the War Dept. required that aspect of the plot to be cut, since much of our public publicity campaign against the Nazis was based on their anti-Semitism, and the censors determined that showing anti-Semitism in the US would undercut the message the War Department was conveying about the Third Reich. Despite this, it's a well-crafted film, funny in places, heartbreaking in others. Rains' greatest performance. Not Bette Davis's best, but her grudging transformation from vain beauty to an ugly hag with no friends who finally recognizes real love is a real tear jerker--in the best sense.
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)
Don't bother, unless you already know the plot
I wouldn't recommend this film unless you've read the book or watched the predecessor version of Tinker Tailor. But seeing this version without such prior "research" was like walking into a crowd of strangers while one of them is in the middle of telling an "in" joke. I like movies that hold me in suspense, but the suspense shouldn't be about "who the hell is that, where is he, and what's going on?" Worse, the editing of many scenes seems designed to enhance the gratuitous confusion--abruptly cutting a scene just as I might have the slightest inkling of who that is, or what's going on. Am I just stupid, is this a gimmick, or did the film's director and editor simply make some consistently poor choices? I vote for the latter. Ultimately, I was left with this profound question: why should I care about a Cold War plot, 20 years after the Cold War is over, when they don't even bother to tell me who is who? There's lots of good acting, wasted, just like my evening watching this.
The Help (2011)
Terrific performances, but the movie "wimped out."
Cautionary comment: My principal complaint is based on having read the book first, and I'm the first to admit that I hate it when people complain, "but in the book . . . ." HOWEVER, The screenwriters/producers/editors CONSISTENTLY took the edginess out of the book. They consistently deleted powerful scenes from the book that underscored the pervasiveness of the racism of the era. What they deleted illustrated so much more powerfully the quiet courage of the protagonists of this fabulous story. I won't go into detail about what they cut so I won't reveal the plot variations, but the consistency with which they sliced and diced shows a pre- determined decision to make the movie "sweeter" and more upbeat. But this decision made the choices of the characters seem "safer" and their decisions therefore less significant. It's too bad, because the film is beautifully acted and filmed.
The Tourist (2010)
Good Posture is Overrated
The Strengths of The Tourist: --Ms. Jolie's posture is excellent.
The weaknesses of The Tourist: --Just about everything else. But particularly, a) the stupid, hackneyed dialog; b) the snail's pace (a BAD sign for a "thriller"); c) the utter misuse of Mr. Depp and Ms. Jolie's considerable talents; d) the contrived plot; d) the lack of a single character worthy of caring about.
To be fair, Ms. Jolie's costumes were quite elaborate, too.
To be honest, I watched it for free,thanks to Netflix, yet still feel ripped off.
Just goes to show: posture is overrated.
The American (2010)
Nothing Happens
I don't necessarily mind when nothing happens in a movie if there's some more profound purpose for it. In fact, someone once described Samuel Beckett's classic play, "Waiting for Godot," as one in which nothing happens--twice. Here, unfortunately, nothing happens for a long, long time, and the screenwriter is hardly Samuel Beckett. Whenever anything DOES happen, you wonder, why did that happen, and who cares anyway? Lots of painstaking, lingering detail over unimportant details, but virtually everything that might matter in the plot or character development is overlooked entirely. The women are attractive, and Clooney shaves after the first scene (oops, I hope I didn't give away a crucial plot twist), but rarely does anything interesting happen, and why should we give a hoot about any of the characters in this movie? Clooney usually chooses his film projects wisely, and so I watched it, but we all have our clinkers in life. This is one of his.
Inception (2010)
A cure for insomnia, even without earplugs ( which would help)
My wife and I fell for all the hype and went to this monstrosity of a film. I tried very hard to "get it," but my wife just fell asleep. I appreciate the objective of venturing into the wonders of Dreamland, but I've gone nighty-night every night for nearly 63 years without ANYTHING remotely resembling any level of any of the dreams portrayed. My first problem with the film was the basic technical premise of one person being able to get inside another person's dreams. OK, I was willing to accept the concept on faith, but here you have a bunch of supposedly brilliant characters explaining it to each other, and their explanations lurched between "sophomoric" and "incoherent." Then, accepting the dubious premises of the story, you have this idea that the dream compresses time as compared to reality, so the dream within the dream compresses time even further, and so forth. OK, I'll buy that, but the EFFECT of this is that when we're two HOURS into the movie, suddenly everything is going VERY slowly. We watch that van falling imperceptibly toward the water, and although there's a lot of hyperkinetic action going on at the other levels, my wife is sound asleep and I'm asking myself whether it will take all night for that damn van to hit the water so we can all go home. And while all this is going on, who within the story do we really care about? The dead wife? The cute chick who was supposed to be so smart, but just kind of sits there and doesn't do much as the plot unfolds? The rich guy whose brains are being used as an Interstate Freeway and shooting gallery for some other rich guy's advantage? Leonardo? Forget it. He's like Captain Ahab chasing the whale, but at least Ahab had the good grace to go down to his death with the whale. The only ones I could empathize with were the two little kids, and they've turned their back on their father. I don't blame them.
Cú và chim se se (2007)
Blew me Away
As the adoptive father of a Vietnamese orphan, I was absolutely blown away by this film, about a little girl, orphaned, who is living with/working for, her verbally abusive uncle and runs away to Saigon, where she lives on the street, selling post cards and roses, until she befriends a young adult woman and becomes the matchmaker between the woman and a young man. It's charming, but also heartbreaking because of the honest portrayal of children living on their own on the streets of Saigon, left to survive for themselves. There, but for the grace of God, could go my own lovely daughter. How rare it is to have four characters who are each so honest and genuine.
Amazing Grace (2006)
Stunning
Honestly, we rented it only because our daughter's name is Grace. And we were slow to watch it because it looked like it would be one of those stodgy, slow-moving, historical dramas. Boy, were we wrong. It was one of the most moving, heartfelt, stunning films I've ever seen. It's on a par with the best historical drama I'd previously seen, "A Man for All Seasons," but with a story that has much more contemporary relevance. Tremendous acting, great script, great story. It's just an outstanding movie in all respects. I'm surprised it didn't get more accolades when it was released. It surely deserved every plaudit it received, and more.
The Lovely Bones (2009)
A Stunning Achievement: Even Dumber that "2012"
I thought "2012" might have been the worst movie ever, but that was because I hadn't seen this dog yet. This had all the implausibility of "2012," plus crashing boredom to boot. Somehow, they got too enamored with creating elaborate visuals of the afterlife, or whatever netherworld this poor kid was dumped into. Once having created these special effects, they had to USE them, and LINGER on them, OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Thereby, they succeeded only in bringing the film to a screeching halt, which wasn't easy, because the pace was glacial to start with. Lost in the swamp was any psychological motivation of any of the characters, so it was hard to care about any of them. For example: Susie's sister, who, after discovering the murderer, and somehow escaping and getting back to her home with the incriminating evidence, runs into the house and stands there like a stone for an interminable pause rather than scream something and give the evidence to her parents. Or the ludicrous, improbable,and unsatisfying ending. I feel bad for the actors, many of whom have done great work elsewhere (most notably poor Stanley Tucci and Rachael Weisz). Unlike "2012," this could have been a very good movie, which made this dud all the more disappointing.
2012 (2009)
If it's not the stupidest movie ever. . .
. . .What is? I like crash, boom, burn, as much as anyone. I like chase scenes. I like action.
BUT, I also like at least some of the laws of physics. Or, even if I don't "like" them, I appreciate that they have some relationship to how things crash, explode, etc. And when a movie persistently flouts every possible law of physics just to inject artificial drama into the scene, it results in less enjoyment of the action sequences, not more.
Also, I like love stories and human interaction. But when the clock is ticking down to the last minute or two of total annihilation, and people who are purportedly intelligent, thinking people, chose that moment to have an extended discussion of their feelings, GIVE ME A BREAK.
And I usually don't mind movie that run over 2 hours because, sometimes it just takes longer to help the audience understand the human motivation, or to give the plot enough time to evolve logically. But to waste over 2 1/2 hours and still wind up with a ridiculous, incoherent plot, with characters that are worse than implausible and who waste some good actors' talents? Ugh.