Reviews

tech talk and SEAL gadgets, good camera work, i.e. the shoot 'em ups work fine; but thin plot, drawn out- same poor guys nonstop from jungle to desert to Mexico: and the stoppers: 1. the NCO: a senior chief who never says sir to an officer, and somehow briefs the missions, tells team leader officer where they go, when they go, what to do- got the word from 'the boss'; hello: captain or above in charge of several teams fighting international terror do not brief an NCO to run multiple team missions; absurd 2. the phone: on active duty, combat patrols, aircraft carrier, and you call home on your phone? love you babe, gotta go? 3. go or stay? team member jolted by screams says we gotta go; officer says have to stay here, then almost all of them get up and go 4. bad shooting SEALS? back of truck, 2 SEALS, automatic weapons, endless ammo, can't stop a pickup following no more than 50 yards behind them; maybe 75, 100 shots, pickup keeps coming; no way just too many of theses butting in, and when the plot thins out they really are stoppers

masquerading as harmless fun with SNL retreads, some comic scenes are obliterated by a final message, i.e. the worst losers can pretend to be winners if their opponents bend over backwards to arrange it; it's not everyone's a winner, it's not non-competitive summer camp with absurd games- as if kids don't know who is fast and who is slow, who can catch and who can't; and it's even beyond gump where serendipitous events conspire to arrange success; dreadful message is you can win if everyone else makes sure that they lose; geez- and the senior losers all get hot blondes in the end; right; there is no saving grace, no silver lining, and who knows why IMDb insists that any review must be ten lines long

starring a couple listed on the show's credits as producer, and who own the real estate company doing the work; except they don't work; job of the male lead is to pull up to a job site in his pimped-out porsche knowing nothing about the job status, costs, progress, and be outraged that it's not done; you will see some of vegas not often shown on TV; you won't see anything about construction; put up a trellis? 6 frames of stop motion and it's up, no permit, as usual; but you will see how to paint old cabinets and tell clients the kitchen has all been redone; not renewed for years but the old ones still running- as are only a couple of the reality redo shows that reflect some reality- neither one based on flipping; this old house if you can stand the slow pace and fussiness that would never cut it on a real job, and the endless PC-eco take on everything; holmes makes it right offers much more construction detail, and thankfully limits the homeowner reality angst to a few minutes of intro; holmes is thorough, and also covers costs, though solutions on a 400-500k house with problems often entail 250k donations plus likely 150k labor to fix

the most bizarre thing about the show is that it's received so many just thrilled with it reviews- before it aired; nicely orchestrated campaign, and, frankly, surprised with all the safeguards to sign in here, the tedious spelling rules, that IMDb let those raves about a show not on air yet go through; i tried watching twice based on the links to breaking bad, but while Saul worked as a minor character, a nice venal, snarky counterpoint to dreary Jesse and big brain Walt, he can't carry a show; and the re-branding of characters from b'bad undercuts the show even more because you know them as they appeared; worst, while b'bad was twisty, often unexpected, Saul is very predictable, i.e. you knew the skateboard dummies would screw up so all the planning was silly ahead of time; not often that a minor, compartmentalized character transitions well to his or her own show, including this one

program rates a 9-plus for the archival footage- and in color; mud is brown, jungles are green, water is blue, and somehow soldiers become younger; but unlike the world at war series, the narration here is no match for Olivier and his tight, factual script; this take is much more general, and the reader not very interested; so a 7 instead of a 9 for script problems like the apologia for Montgomery at Caen in the overlord episode; Monty was the modern version of Lincoln's reluctant general Mcclellan; in Africa Monty waited for reinforcements instead of attacking; on the d-day beaches the Brits had the left flank and simply failed to make any progress while all the other beachheads pushed inland; the narration mentions getting bogged down in the weather but stunningly overlooks what could have crippled the invasion; Lincoln replaced Mcclellan, but Monty was a fabled figure and beyond reprimand; like Patton he was an egotistical sob; but Patton was aggressive, a tactical genius, while Monty was more of a bean counter who preferred to wait until he had a staggeringly superior force

if you've never seen high sierra this could be a six; if you have it drops- thus the 3; it's in color, which doesn't fit the film noir take; palance is no Bogart, more an early sly stallion overdoing everything; and for stunning, vulnerable Ida lupine they picked somewhat chunky almost boy haircut mostly whiny Shelly winters; the tension of high sierra is unstrung in almost every way- with palance going from happy smiley- and boy is that not Roy Earle- to glowering; winters delivers the final crash out line as though she's asking for a newspaper; and the intense, thematic score in the original is adolph deutch with other masterful score credits like mask of Demetrius, Maltese falcon, the apartment, some like it hot; the remake score is a dud written by a guy who did the TV theme for maverick; you have to wonder what the backers were thinking; but it's hard to find a great remake, even a good one: kenneth branagh redoes olivier? please; clooney and crowd outdo the rat pack? not even close; i'd vote for scarface with it's griity update; hitchock redid some of his early antiques with success; but taking on a classic like high sierra- moody, gripping, silky b+w, powerful Bogart, evocative lupino- you have to hit every step to even come close, and this one trips up almost fro the start;

the story is intriguing- nazi hunter after maniacal genius; the screenplay is sharp- realistic, terse, always in character; the filming is superb- wells displaying his mastery of b+w in such unusual shots as winding a clock totally in shade while the cheery connecticut room is lit behind him, and the unknowing nazi's wife coming undone as the film of concentration camps finishes and slaps at the projector; brilliant e.g. robinson- incisive, edgy, and in his own way as maniacal for good as wells' character is for evil; supporting cast all solid; people who like the movie may not like the one distraction- the not so bad but noticeable overacting by the unknowing nazi's wife loretta young; recalled in a ball gown coming down the staircase in her own TV series, this is an extreme departure for the calm and the quiet charm; but every once in a while in the overall solid performance she is the only one who pokes through the screen to say i'm acting here; that makes the deduction to a 9; if you don't know the film it is not a 7.5, or an 8.5; astonishing to see some of the negative reviews that complain about knowing he's a nazi too soon, or that it's too slow; it is a sharp, acutely edited that rates classic status on every measurable level of cinema

another mostly staged 'reality' show structured around the most implausible premise: that people will travel miles through the bush, take long boat rides, plane rides, to look at house not knowing how much it costs; no one does that; but the idea is you'll be watching, then, finally, the question arises- how much is it- then cut to commercial and you'll stay to find out; but too often the top end budget is, for example, 300k, and after seeing a few dogs under the limit there's the nice one they like- for 450k; then there are the majestic mountainside homes sporting endless vistas in all direction- and some very nice scenery for sure- turns out on a 1/4-acre lot? given the alaskan setting, the show also suffers form dwelling on decor, and endless versions of 'i really like that kitchen', or 'not enough closets'- instead of details about structure, heating, insulation and more that are unusual in much of alaska; supposedly, buyers are motivated to be in an unusual and challenging place, but you'd never know it from the empty-headed, scripted comment

tried it again recently on tcm; so bad couldn't stay but dipped in again later and still terrible: story of recent post-war GIs goofed by locals is hackneyed; so is script; it tries to be funny but isn't really, and then loses it trying to show the perils of occupation- and how human the Japanese really are; yeah, if you want to forget the little tidbits like officers practicing beheadings of GI prisoners at the stern of a ship; great funny stuff for the movie? oh, not quite; and movie-wise it is almost a stage play filmed, incredibly static, phony backdrops, just dreadful; so lets say you tuned in just for brando- normally a good enough reason; holy cow- between the makeup, done as much as they could native Japanese, the put on accent, afraid it's akin to jolsen in blackface

so many reasons this movie fails- despite it's super-hyped showing at the white house and a thumbs up from obama; effects are stunningly phony, which is unexpected, specially from lucas, with planes peeling off into certain stalls and pilot blackouts; but the worst is it's almost all fiction- a fairly pathetic attempt to bolster the image of blacks in WW11, which despite some rewriting of history was not good, for instance, the infamous group that went on strike, refusing to load ammo in an American ship- in an American port- because it was too dangerous- as though the men actually using the ammo in battle was safer; a brief check of DOD sources on the web reveals the film's claim of no bombers lost on escort not true, seems 25 or more- and more embarrassing stats the more you look; black pilots did not fill the holes and practically win the war by themselves as shown, despite the heroic efforts of a tiny group of real tuskegee airman- a minuscule group, and black pilots still today even with affirmative action in the services and extra effort to recruit minorities for select training; as the washington post review points out (1/29/2012) "Of 14,130 Air Force pilots in 2009, just 270 identified themselves as black — fewer than 2 percent — according to the Air Force Personnel Center."; the movie is simply false on so many levels- and a disservice to the few blacks who made it past the bias of the 40s and served their country in the air

dated soap opera with every cliché in the book works best as a look at good production values of the time along with period furnishings, clothes and women's perms; but even if you can stand the plot ploys there are some colossal flaws; one, wyman is a stick, unattractive, prissy, and generally a drip; yet rock falls for her- and wants to date her in the car before she has her accident and he becomes obsessed with guilt; two, he was not responsible for wyman's husband's death; he didn't ask for a respirator, know they had only one, or that someone else might be needing it; three; he didn't cause her accident; he was trying to offer money for the hospital and befriend the cold stick when she bolted out the other door into traffic; four; she could be his mom, and he goes from glamorous girls in the bar to her, again, before he even knows who she is; five, wastrel drunk playboy rock becomes a great doctor; rock, a brain surgeon?; but there is nothing the actors can do about the story; poor agnes moorehead, a firebrand, reduced to head shots with a slight turn and wistful look- no agnes, more wistful than that; it's just dreadful, with score to match

the laughable bottom of the barrel for reality shows; but will he be able to fight through the snowstorm- says the voice-over as the camera is there already, searching for the arrival- then cut to commercial; the worst is s southern con man called eustace who has an avaricious website that belies his supposed lifestyle of living off the land; among other travesties- he and a friend ride to the sound of chain saws to shoot whomever is cutting their trees, in the wilderness he supposedly lives in; nope; it a developer on his own side of the property line; looking for the real thing? try the by now quite old dick proneke book and documentary he filmed himself- real loner surviving the wilderness in style; the kirchers reality is better than mountain men, but suffers from the same hype- and we're so remote, so self-reliant, hunting, fishing so we don't starve- so what are all those old cars doing there? dropped from the sky?

echoing a lesser known melville story, bartleby the scrivener, this movie is a topsy-turvey tale around an office that punishes employees who work hard and rewards the one who goes fishing (in bartleby, the employee shows up but never does any work- incredibly offbeat for 1853); an alliance among friends of fired and promoted produces a scheme to skim fractions of pennies from bank transaction; that's their stage; young yuppie computer geeks, except for the lead who plays a nice ascorbic, bemused character and happens to land jennifer anniston who is suitably pert, charming, and probably the best acting job in the film; movie is light, offbeat, sometimes funny, more often poking fun, and gets a 7.5; above that it hard for a comedy to score unless it's an enduring classic, to me anyway; the drawback; someone decided that an almost totally white, yuppy, computer, software, glass office, world would be a great match for rap music- yelling, repetitive, tuneless; couldn't be more out of place and as soon as it starts to cover action with no dialogue you wonder what is going on and when will it stop; reminded me of hockey games, break in the action and immediately piped in music comes so loud you can barely talk- as if the movie director didn't trust the plot, the action, to interest you and wanted a crutch- and wow de he pick the wrong one; otherwise a solid example of what most movies are there to do: entertain

the main flaw is a part reviewers seem to love: McDowell as the aging gangster; he simply does not register as the future of Paul Bethany as the young gangster- in height, looks, voice, demeanor; everyone else is right there, good fit, which means that the movie works very well until you get to the aging part; then the crazy, electric, calculating, vicious gangster turns into pretty much an old fud who walks around smoking cigars and rambling on about his past, i.e. not very interesting; it's as if Capone became a financier; electric deniro as the young godfather became an aged fredo instead of Brando who is quite civil and well kept- and will have the horse decapitated no problem; but until you get there, the movie is a first-rate but graphically brutal crime drama with brilliant small performances by lizard-tongued Lenny and others; camera is good, sets are good, script is good, editing is tight, impending terror and doom abound; but better and tighter and no end of movie letdown due to shift of time and place- and way too much shift in character- is the krays; blistering; stunning Billie whitelaw as the twins mum; it's graphically brutal, too, if that's a stopper, but an 8 or a 9 in this ilk

people who cope with the alaskan wilderness should be interesting by definition; for instance, there are the great books and old color film of dick proneke; he was the only one there and painstakingly set up a camera, then walked back to the cabin door, then walked to the camera for a shot of him leaving to hunt; these days you get set ups- some producer's idea of what people might watch, and it's not what people really do; and most, like this one, are loaded with phony cliffhanging dangers; a guy's snowmobile breaks down, he can't fix it, he'll freeze- yeah except there's at least one more sled with a cameraman, sound man and director; or billy finally makes it to his friends float house and, holy cow, the camera crew is already there to film billy arriving; on top of that, the brown's are not very good at doing anything; some also go into the o-degree wilderness wearing black leather motorcycle jackets; the family head is maybe 50 something, just said he was a commercial fisherman for 29 years; if he started at 21, that would mean his great family tradition of bush living started a couple of years ago; there's just too much too often that doesn't ring true; you might not care if they were intelligent, ingenious, articulate; but they're not

considered groundbreaking, and even some posts say just amazed that there was anti- semetism before world war 2- like Hitler invented the idea; if you're that naive perhaps you will like this movie where a writer who wants facts and figures on the subject instead pretends to be Jewish and discovers it first hand; earnest peck, earnest script, with the one-note message; somehow everyone forgot that by the 1940s Jews headed all the major movie studios in America; look them up: Zukor, Goldwyn, Schenk, Mayer, Selznick, Thalberg, Cohn, Fox, Shulberg, Warner, Loew; so Zanuck is credited with taking such a leap, but who was going say no? and if he lost money (with peck?) who was going to fire him? c'mon; okay, so as to movie making and story enough to say it takes peck half an hour to discover the shattering idea that he could pretend to be Jewish; then there's the absurd opposite of Hitler's caricatures where peck says dark hair dark eyes just like his Jewish friend, discovering on his sophomoric quest that you may not look like a jew (yes, he's still clinging to that) to be a jew; then there's the ardent kiss goodbye as he goes off to battle- oops, goes off to stay in restricted hotels- and can bail to his office any time he feels like it; so a few stars for getting there first, but the rest is obvious, non-stop preachy, and predictable

there is nothing amiss in this victorian sea adventure, but nothing; you could watch it alone, with your kids- and then wonder why no follow on; the characters are personal, precise, interesting, intelligent; there are heroes young and old, a driven plot line that keeps pushing the story forward, very amusing asides, very realistic life on board, danger, music, science- all wrapped up in an unlikely package that is purely and consistently entertaining; of course, reserve 10s for movies that have a lasting message; this one has lasting moments; crowe consistently in character with bravura and subtlety; bettany (if you've seen his one-off performance in gangster no. 1) reversed in a cunningly sensitive role- and aside from that interestingly shot, edited, locales; can't miss with this- and, again, begging for a master and commander 2

start with the music, brian easdale (also outcast of the islands, black narcissus, others) but red shoes with the unique twist of making some boring on purpose; you don't hear a lot of the original score for the ballet, but enough to agree with lermontov that it is impossible; in one of the best scenes, craster plays piano snippets of his themes for the churchyard, adds a bell, sings the part of the strings- and it ignites everyone in the room, including lubov who is already inspired to see the dance; so there is the old version of themes, the new score piano only, and of course later the orchestrated version; always wondered which he did first, good to bad or vice versa; so lermontov was wrong (the music is all the matters) but he had a point; then there is the ground breaking color, camera, riveting performances, luscious sets and locations, and in the end a heartbreaking story; the tenth time you see it, you'll find more, like the moonlight carriage ride when craster sees himself, old, decades later, remembering the night; in Latin there's an apt phrase: haec olim meminisse juvabit, loosely, it will be a joy later to remember these things- the way it will be after you see the movie, or see it again

hard to rate: pretty good for a film school thesis? how about an 11; cinema to study as a precursor to several great films? maybe a 5 or 6; as a movie, just a movie, maybe 3; two big problems: story is loose, too often sophomoric, too much filler dialog of no help, never defines the main character, sometimes nerd, sometimes rube, adventurous and off to a new life, a wimp who reports to daddy; worse problem, the actor who plays him, kastner: no screen presence, often unpleasant, beady expression in closeups where he's supposed to be interested, thinking; in drawn out tours of Manhattan, watching him watch NYC, no reason to care; when the locations overwhelm the star of the movie you sense more trouble to come; it does; but, amazingly to me, he was nominate for bafta 'Most Promising Newcomer to Leading Film Roles' in '68, then went on to do mainly minor parts in minor TV series; somehow, film student Coppola got appearances from Geraldine Paige and Julie Harris, both at home with the camera, and a john Sebastian soundtrack; newcomer in small role that leaps out is Karen black, a natural; so settle on a 5- for the history of cinema, and glimpses like break to sepia and stills in a flashback become some of the great scenes in godfather 2

in bridges at toko-ri, word is holden took the role only on condition that Hollywood wouldn't clean up the blistering ending and save him; if only someone had injected that grit into stalag 17; holden tries to; very good performance, edgy, intelligent, cynical; but it's downhill from there despite billy wilder; way too much of the movie centers on a duffus zero mostel wannabe who dances, clowns, dresses up and such with his pals; there is more than one very long dance sequence; problem being that every time holden build some edge, tension, even develops the very slow plot, in comes a new prisoner who does impressions of cary grant, ho ho ho- and we're talking gilligan's island level of comedy; again and again it kills holden's sharpness; a split personality movie; about 1/3 is very good, edgy, intriguing; 2/3 is a hogan's heroes without the laugh track; a nod to neville brand playing neville brand as he always did; preminger as commandant way over the top; watch this and it seems likely that wilder was more often put over the top by actor's performances than his script or direction; camera in stalag is basically filming a stage play; like the genre? grand illusion is edgy, poignant, funny parts, puts this one to shame

amazing that this gets a 7.6 overall- maybe ion homage to the first two, and the strange idea that coppola could make probably the best sequel ever made (godfather 2) and then one of the worst; and to be fair, public word is that the director was experiencing some very difficult times, but still, among the problems; the plot is basically ludicrous; some of the acting as well; shire has decided to act with hand movements, two out here, two out there as no one you have ever scene gesticulate as they talk; the son has no stage presence; the daughter is about as non photogenic as you can get yet playing the most desirable girl; and think of the family taken over by michael, now taken over by a loudmouth, wiseass, leather jacket andy garcia? hello? the best parts, of course, are flashbacks; advice is watch 1+2, which are stunners, and make up your own conclusion to the sage; it will be more interesting

brilliant shooting by wise, great low-key winters, truly searing robert ryan who carries the movie, intense offbeat begley, unfortunately bogged down by belafonte- pop singer who is a stick on screen; of course the main point is race relations, and that's the part you wind up feeling as a preachy intrusion that almost cripples a stunning film noir crime drama heist rivaling some of the best like rififi; didn't need the help but john lewis score also tops , though also didn't need the minor showcase of belafonte doing his bit in a nightclub, but his company put up the money so he got some cameos; if you have the time to read up, wise shot standard aspect ratio, used infra-red film in some scenes; interesting that variety had it right, and tactfully, after the opening: " "On one level, Odds against Tomorrow is a taut crime melodrama. On another, it is an allegory about racism, greed and man's propensity for self-destruction. Not altogether successful in the second category, it still succeeds on its first." yup

often billed as a funny battle of the sexes, it really isn't; it's no contest; tracy comes off as asoft-spoken guy who treats his wife pretty well; hepburn on the other hand is frequently strident and rude; he seems devoted to her while she constantly flirts with the neighbor; he treats her respectfully, she revels in humiliating him at home and at work in court; sure, some of the disconnected skits are funny, mainly helped by judy holiday, not hepburn; and his moment of ethical and legal revenge is instantly dismissed by her; overall needed more give and take like other tracy-hepburn movies, and less of the relentless, one-sided pounding where tracy in the end has to pull a girlish trick to win back the woman who treats him as an incompetent fool

the PC message is pounded into you; problem is it's a flawed message, presented with flat, uncomplicated, stereotypical characters; same for their dialogue; first, it's not an accidental intravenous HIV; it's from promiscuous activity with strangers and totally self-inflicted; i'm not PC enough to blur the distinction- like the driver blindsided versus the drunk driver who hits him; that circumstance in this movie and somehow the drunk would be the hero; second, do any business owners want an active HIV patient with lesions and hair loss looking about to die dealing with clients- law firm or otherwise? should they be forced to, even if it loses clients? in court hanks is so beat he's wheezing and coughing and collapsing, but he should still be working for the firm? still, those circumstances had potential; except the low-life promiscuous HIV patient somehow turns out to be a smart sensitive lawyer devoted to his caring partner; except the big-time lawyers he loved working for turn out to be sniggering low-lifes who constantly make homophobic, grade-school jokes; movie concentrates on supposed heroes and villains- who cares about responsibility- and keeps drawing the cardboard distinctions again, and again, and again