I can appreciate the fact that the Clash has many very loyal fans, but I always thought that reciting Marxist slogans was not entirely compatible with signing a contract with CBS. Leftist ideology tends to be critical of overtly exploitative corporate marketing schemes like Clash lunchboxes and jigsaw puzzles. T-shirts and posters are one thing, but this is more like the way they milk Star Wars for every penny they can. Of course, I don't expect, nor would ever even consider, trying to change anyone's opinions about them. Unfortunately, I've known too many people who take these things way too personally. They would probably not like this film...
Reviews
31 Reviews
Combover: The Movie
(2005)
Entertaining and Informative
21 March 2008
If you've ever had any questions about combovers, this is the movie to see. Or, even if you've never given any thought to the subject, I'd still recommend it for its entertainment value. I'd disagree that it's at all mean spirited.
The entertainment is almost entirely from the interviewees, all of whom were very good-natured about their do's. Several had great senses of humor. I really only saw one case where anyone was "stalked". In the opening minutes, the producer pursued a man down the street in NYC, backing off when the guy threatened him with bodily harm.
There were two big surprises (not at all spoilers). One was the young man who deliberately shaves his head so that he can have a combover. I'd say the best word to describe him would be "individualist", or perhaps "eccentric" (in a positive way).
The other was the son of the man who actually patented the combover. I never would have guessed such a thing could even be patented. Judging from the man's home, it doesn't appear to have been the most lucrative patent one could hold.
If you get a chance, don't pass this one up!
The entertainment is almost entirely from the interviewees, all of whom were very good-natured about their do's. Several had great senses of humor. I really only saw one case where anyone was "stalked". In the opening minutes, the producer pursued a man down the street in NYC, backing off when the guy threatened him with bodily harm.
There were two big surprises (not at all spoilers). One was the young man who deliberately shaves his head so that he can have a combover. I'd say the best word to describe him would be "individualist", or perhaps "eccentric" (in a positive way).
The other was the son of the man who actually patented the combover. I never would have guessed such a thing could even be patented. Judging from the man's home, it doesn't appear to have been the most lucrative patent one could hold.
If you get a chance, don't pass this one up!
The Bible and Gun Club
(1996)
Bizarre and Hilarious, or Hilarious and Bizarre
5 December 2005
Beyond that, it's scary - scary because there really are people like this, as abundant as ever, from one end of this great land to the other! As inframan noted, there's an element of Gummo in this movie. Not that it's as completely off the wall as that one is, but it's close. The alternately jazzy and rock and roll music sets the mood perfectly, and the black and white makes it hard to place this movie in a specific time period, adding to the overall sense of surreality.
What's incredible is that someone could think up something this crazy at all. It elevates the non sequitur to an art form. Watch for running gags surrounding "soiled" towels and sebaceous cysts. I give it an 8, primarily for originality....
What's incredible is that someone could think up something this crazy at all. It elevates the non sequitur to an art form. Watch for running gags surrounding "soiled" towels and sebaceous cysts. I give it an 8, primarily for originality....
Con Air
(1997)
I'd forgotten how stupid this movie is.
23 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I rented this a while back, and my main recollection was that I didn't pay much attention to it. Having seen it again on TV, I now know why: it failed to keep my attention because the plot was so completely unbelievable. To put it another way, it's a stupid movie. I try to avoid using such terms when reviewing movies, but in this situation it's the most appropriate one.
That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy a mindless movie. For example, "Die Hard with a Vengeance" is equally as implausible, but it doesn't take itself very seriously and it's at least entertaining. The plot is clever and Bruce Willis does a good job.
I'm afraid there is virtually nothing redeeming in "Con Air". I can forgive such problems as the fact that the real "Con Air" uses passenger aircraft rather than converted military cargo planes, or that a released prisoner on his way home would not be flown via the real "Con Air". I could even handle the extremely unlikely eventuality of nearly every one of the most dangerous criminals in the US being on one plane, as long as it's done well.
Possible Spoiler Alert!
This simply isn't done well. Rather than at least ATTEMPT to be somewhat original, it succumbs to the temptation of using cheap cliché after cliché. To name but a few: the Hannibal Lecter clone played by Steve Buscemi (in yet another quirky role); the body falling out of the sky on the hood of a car; the Corvette being pulled behind the plane taking off, then dropping RIGHT IN FRONT of John Cusack and his DEA rival; the armored car that blows up immediately upon impact with a fire truck; Nicholas Cage, who'd been shot, yet 20 minutes later is jumping from a motorcycle onto the same fire truck (and the sloppy editing that tries to convey the idea); the motorcycle that (what a surprise) continues on its course and runs into the back of the fire truck, bursting into flames (where have we seen that before?) and killing one of the bad guys; the false alarm ending of the movie, after the plane has landed in a casino full of people, NOT ONE is killed; the slot machine that starts spewing coins as it's hit by the same plane; etc, etc, etc, etc.
Those are just a few of the MANY, MANY clichés in this contender for "Most Clichés per Minute Award" that contribute to the overall tedious quality of the plot. One thing that I found most baffling was the decision to have Nicholas Cage speak in a (presumably) "Southern" accent. I grew up on the South and know Southern accents. His was so bad that it wasn't even laughable. Why did they not simply have him use his own voice? It would have been a slight improvement.
Moving on, I was saddened to see several good actors in this sorry affair. John Malkovich is clearly way above this sort of material. I can see him as a criminal genius, such as in the immeasurably superior "In the Line of Fire", where he was chillingly convincing as a troubled ex-CIA agent who taunted Secret Service agent Clint Eastwood. Likewise, John Cusack is NOT an action hero, so when they try to make it look like he can jump from a moving police motorcycle (that conveniently had the key left in the ignition) onto a fire truck (yes, THAT fire truck, and THAT sloppy editing), it's just not the sort of role I expect to see him in. When he's thrown off onto the roof of a car, is he injured, are any bones broken? No way! He's tougher than old Arnie the Terminator himself! He's up on his feet as if it's nothing at all to drop 15+ feet from a fire truck at high speed and land on a car.
I could go on and on. I've seen movies that were bad enough to be entertaining, like "Firestarter" or the infamous "Hot Rods to Hell!", but this isn't even entertainingly bad. It's just plain bad! Don't waste your time.
That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy a mindless movie. For example, "Die Hard with a Vengeance" is equally as implausible, but it doesn't take itself very seriously and it's at least entertaining. The plot is clever and Bruce Willis does a good job.
I'm afraid there is virtually nothing redeeming in "Con Air". I can forgive such problems as the fact that the real "Con Air" uses passenger aircraft rather than converted military cargo planes, or that a released prisoner on his way home would not be flown via the real "Con Air". I could even handle the extremely unlikely eventuality of nearly every one of the most dangerous criminals in the US being on one plane, as long as it's done well.
Possible Spoiler Alert!
This simply isn't done well. Rather than at least ATTEMPT to be somewhat original, it succumbs to the temptation of using cheap cliché after cliché. To name but a few: the Hannibal Lecter clone played by Steve Buscemi (in yet another quirky role); the body falling out of the sky on the hood of a car; the Corvette being pulled behind the plane taking off, then dropping RIGHT IN FRONT of John Cusack and his DEA rival; the armored car that blows up immediately upon impact with a fire truck; Nicholas Cage, who'd been shot, yet 20 minutes later is jumping from a motorcycle onto the same fire truck (and the sloppy editing that tries to convey the idea); the motorcycle that (what a surprise) continues on its course and runs into the back of the fire truck, bursting into flames (where have we seen that before?) and killing one of the bad guys; the false alarm ending of the movie, after the plane has landed in a casino full of people, NOT ONE is killed; the slot machine that starts spewing coins as it's hit by the same plane; etc, etc, etc, etc.
Those are just a few of the MANY, MANY clichés in this contender for "Most Clichés per Minute Award" that contribute to the overall tedious quality of the plot. One thing that I found most baffling was the decision to have Nicholas Cage speak in a (presumably) "Southern" accent. I grew up on the South and know Southern accents. His was so bad that it wasn't even laughable. Why did they not simply have him use his own voice? It would have been a slight improvement.
Moving on, I was saddened to see several good actors in this sorry affair. John Malkovich is clearly way above this sort of material. I can see him as a criminal genius, such as in the immeasurably superior "In the Line of Fire", where he was chillingly convincing as a troubled ex-CIA agent who taunted Secret Service agent Clint Eastwood. Likewise, John Cusack is NOT an action hero, so when they try to make it look like he can jump from a moving police motorcycle (that conveniently had the key left in the ignition) onto a fire truck (yes, THAT fire truck, and THAT sloppy editing), it's just not the sort of role I expect to see him in. When he's thrown off onto the roof of a car, is he injured, are any bones broken? No way! He's tougher than old Arnie the Terminator himself! He's up on his feet as if it's nothing at all to drop 15+ feet from a fire truck at high speed and land on a car.
I could go on and on. I've seen movies that were bad enough to be entertaining, like "Firestarter" or the infamous "Hot Rods to Hell!", but this isn't even entertainingly bad. It's just plain bad! Don't waste your time.
Fahrenheit 9/11
(2004)
Keep it up, you'll just draw even MORE attention to it!
19 June 2004
I get a real kick out of people who, in their determination to dissuade people from seeing a movie, only contribute to the controversy and draw more attention to it. What is the result? MORE people see it. The same thing happened with "The Last Temptation of Christ". That means it will make more money for its investors, which ensures it will get a wide release. Smart going, guys!
Moore's talent is in taking subjects people would rather not think about and presenting them in a form that is entertaining. He exploits the weakness of those whom he attacks: their greed. Since he can make them lots of money, they overlook the inconvenient facts he presents and focus on their bank balances instead.
So keep it up. At this rate, Fahrenheit 9/11 will be the top grossing movie the weekend it opens!
Moore's talent is in taking subjects people would rather not think about and presenting them in a form that is entertaining. He exploits the weakness of those whom he attacks: their greed. Since he can make them lots of money, they overlook the inconvenient facts he presents and focus on their bank balances instead.
So keep it up. At this rate, Fahrenheit 9/11 will be the top grossing movie the weekend it opens!
The Poseidon Adventure
(1972)
Serious stuff in '72, a barrel of laughs now!
1 January 2004
I sat through this thing in the theatre, and I guess I was able to suspend my disbelief, although I never bothered to see it again until tonight. Now I know why. Were it not for the characters constant arguing and bellyaching all the way, the movie would have been half as long! I guess that's the element of "drama" at work.
The genre this "classic" spawned was among the stranger ones that Hollywood has produced over the years. While it's not as bad as the dog movie (or it's latest variant, the kangaroo movie), the disaster genre has had some real gems over the years (n.b. the "Airport" movie where a jumbo jet, FULL OF AIR, sits at the bottom of the sea - in the Bermuda Triangle, of course!). Actually, the "Poseidon Adventure" was not really the first disaster movie. "A Night to Remember", about the Titanic, was an earlier, and better, one. However, "Poseidon" was the one that started a rash of copies.
If you haven't seen this, it's worth it for a laugh. Watch for Ernie Borgnine's constant questioning of Gene Hackman's leadership and his bullying attitude towards the stereotypical "inquisitive little boy". Also, don't miss Hackman's "sermonette" at the end. I don't want to give anything away, so I'll leave it at that. Let's just say that it's obvious why the scene had to be shot from about the knees up.
One thing to consider is this: in '72 "The Poseidon Adventure" was state of the art film making, but now it's pretty much only good for laughs. How will "Titanic" look in 30 years?
Oh yeah, some "adventure"!
The genre this "classic" spawned was among the stranger ones that Hollywood has produced over the years. While it's not as bad as the dog movie (or it's latest variant, the kangaroo movie), the disaster genre has had some real gems over the years (n.b. the "Airport" movie where a jumbo jet, FULL OF AIR, sits at the bottom of the sea - in the Bermuda Triangle, of course!). Actually, the "Poseidon Adventure" was not really the first disaster movie. "A Night to Remember", about the Titanic, was an earlier, and better, one. However, "Poseidon" was the one that started a rash of copies.
If you haven't seen this, it's worth it for a laugh. Watch for Ernie Borgnine's constant questioning of Gene Hackman's leadership and his bullying attitude towards the stereotypical "inquisitive little boy". Also, don't miss Hackman's "sermonette" at the end. I don't want to give anything away, so I'll leave it at that. Let's just say that it's obvious why the scene had to be shot from about the knees up.
One thing to consider is this: in '72 "The Poseidon Adventure" was state of the art film making, but now it's pretty much only good for laughs. How will "Titanic" look in 30 years?
Oh yeah, some "adventure"!
The Reagans
(2003 TV Movie)
If I were Nancy Pants, I wouldn't be happy
30 November 2003
But then, Miss "Just say no" was not happy about a lot of things. There's no telling what might have really been said behind closed doors, but when one compares the historical record with this docudrama, it's hard to imagine how else it might have been. If you're a die-hard Reagan fan, you probably will not like this. Personally, I think it's dead on, but that's just an opinion.
Far more controversial docudramas have been shown, but CBS caved into pressure from the Reagan cultists. That shows the power of the Reagan myth. I might add that I used to be a Reagan supporter, but after he was elected president, I changed to independent....
Far more controversial docudramas have been shown, but CBS caved into pressure from the Reagan cultists. That shows the power of the Reagan myth. I might add that I used to be a Reagan supporter, but after he was elected president, I changed to independent....
Changing Lanes
(2002)
Change the Channel!
29 July 2003
Warning: Spoilers
What is the point of this movie? The situations were so artificial that it was difficult to enter the "suspension of belief" mode, despite this movie's attempts to present a realistic scenario.
POTENTIAL SPOILER ALERT!!!
The whole setup, where Affleck, the hotshot Wall St. Esquire, runs into Samuel Jackson, a down on his luck recovering alcoholic who's trying to keep his family from moving to the West Coast, is impossible to accept. Specifically, the premise that Jackson has lost his day in court because he showed up late due to Affleck's having left the scene of the accident is unrealistic. All he had to do was get to a phone and call the police, or just wait for the high probability that a passing motorist would call 911 with a cell phone, get a police report and show it to the judge. He would then have been in a great position to collect big bucks from Affleck's auto insurance and been able to get an even nicer house. Plus Affleck would be in trouble for having left the scene.
Second, I found it impossible to accept that a presumably capable attorney such as Affleck's character would not be so careless as to not have made COPIES of a document as important as the one he left with Jackson. To put it another way, do they really expect us to believe he only had ONE COPY, ESPECIALLY when the person who signed is is DECEASED????
No, I can't accept it. Then the tit for tat thing is old and was done much better, and much more amusingly, by Laurel and Hardy in their famous short, "Tit for Tat".
Many other details were simply too preposterous to accept, such as the private eye/hacker being able to nullify Jackson's credit in just a few keystrokes. Jackson had all sorts of verified documentation. Then the extreme convenience of Affleck's wheel coming off RIGHT ON CUE on the expressway was just too much. But all of this would be moot in light of the problems outlined in the first paragraph. This movie is one of the most gratuitous I've seen in years.
Maybe the point was to ignore these bothersome facts and concentrate on the "morality lesson" the movie attempts to give us, but I just found the whole thing to be silly.....
POTENTIAL SPOILER ALERT!!!
The whole setup, where Affleck, the hotshot Wall St. Esquire, runs into Samuel Jackson, a down on his luck recovering alcoholic who's trying to keep his family from moving to the West Coast, is impossible to accept. Specifically, the premise that Jackson has lost his day in court because he showed up late due to Affleck's having left the scene of the accident is unrealistic. All he had to do was get to a phone and call the police, or just wait for the high probability that a passing motorist would call 911 with a cell phone, get a police report and show it to the judge. He would then have been in a great position to collect big bucks from Affleck's auto insurance and been able to get an even nicer house. Plus Affleck would be in trouble for having left the scene.
Second, I found it impossible to accept that a presumably capable attorney such as Affleck's character would not be so careless as to not have made COPIES of a document as important as the one he left with Jackson. To put it another way, do they really expect us to believe he only had ONE COPY, ESPECIALLY when the person who signed is is DECEASED????
No, I can't accept it. Then the tit for tat thing is old and was done much better, and much more amusingly, by Laurel and Hardy in their famous short, "Tit for Tat".
Many other details were simply too preposterous to accept, such as the private eye/hacker being able to nullify Jackson's credit in just a few keystrokes. Jackson had all sorts of verified documentation. Then the extreme convenience of Affleck's wheel coming off RIGHT ON CUE on the expressway was just too much. But all of this would be moot in light of the problems outlined in the first paragraph. This movie is one of the most gratuitous I've seen in years.
Maybe the point was to ignore these bothersome facts and concentrate on the "morality lesson" the movie attempts to give us, but I just found the whole thing to be silly.....
The Godfather Part III
(1990)
Initially intriguing, ultimately disappointing...
21 May 2003
I was unsure of what to expect of Godfather III. For me, the last great movie Coppola made was Apocalypse Now. His subsequent works, while as technically flawless as any living director's work today, have lacked importance and impact.
I long ago realized the essentially mythological nature of the Godfather movies, but the first two were at least entertaining and featured great "Coppola" look. (If you want to see something authentic, watch Goodfellas or Casino, or even the Sopranos.) But the Michael Corleone of Godfather III seemed like a different character. He was a lot more like Tony Montana from Scarface than the Michael from Godfather I and II. He had lost his refined, understated manner and gotten gruffer and craggy. Some of this might be attributed to the aging process, but not to this degree.
The idea of a Mafia don occupying a position analogous to royalty or a statesman is ludicrous, but it can make for an entertaining movie. Unfortunately, this does not carry through the entirety of the film. Up until the time Michael and his family travel to Sicily it kept my interest, but during the final, overly long opera scene I simply wished it would end.
There were other problems too, particularly with the film's timing. If we are to believe that this takes place in the time it was actually made, 1990, Michael would have to be about 70 years old (look at the cars, which are all of that time frame). I arrive at this by estimating his age in the Godfather I, which took place around 1945, as 25, meaning he was born around 1920. When he dies, he looks a LOT older than 70, or even 80, yet the movie does not indicate that 10 or 20 years have passed.
Perhaps I'm being a bit too picky, and with most any other director I'd agree. But this is Francis Ford Coppola, one of the best directors living today, so I find it not unreasonable to put his work under the microscope.
We are left with the clear impression that Andy Garcia was being set up as the next don, and I'm sure that there will eventually be a Godfather IV. I can only hope that it's not as disappointing as this I found the third installment to be. As far as Coppola goes, I once had the occasion to communicate with a close associate of his. He claimed that Coppola had been very deeply affected by the death of his son, which would explain a lot. Let us hope that he can find a way to overcome his grief and give us a movie truly representative of his immense talents.....
I long ago realized the essentially mythological nature of the Godfather movies, but the first two were at least entertaining and featured great "Coppola" look. (If you want to see something authentic, watch Goodfellas or Casino, or even the Sopranos.) But the Michael Corleone of Godfather III seemed like a different character. He was a lot more like Tony Montana from Scarface than the Michael from Godfather I and II. He had lost his refined, understated manner and gotten gruffer and craggy. Some of this might be attributed to the aging process, but not to this degree.
The idea of a Mafia don occupying a position analogous to royalty or a statesman is ludicrous, but it can make for an entertaining movie. Unfortunately, this does not carry through the entirety of the film. Up until the time Michael and his family travel to Sicily it kept my interest, but during the final, overly long opera scene I simply wished it would end.
There were other problems too, particularly with the film's timing. If we are to believe that this takes place in the time it was actually made, 1990, Michael would have to be about 70 years old (look at the cars, which are all of that time frame). I arrive at this by estimating his age in the Godfather I, which took place around 1945, as 25, meaning he was born around 1920. When he dies, he looks a LOT older than 70, or even 80, yet the movie does not indicate that 10 or 20 years have passed.
Perhaps I'm being a bit too picky, and with most any other director I'd agree. But this is Francis Ford Coppola, one of the best directors living today, so I find it not unreasonable to put his work under the microscope.
We are left with the clear impression that Andy Garcia was being set up as the next don, and I'm sure that there will eventually be a Godfather IV. I can only hope that it's not as disappointing as this I found the third installment to be. As far as Coppola goes, I once had the occasion to communicate with a close associate of his. He claimed that Coppola had been very deeply affected by the death of his son, which would explain a lot. Let us hope that he can find a way to overcome his grief and give us a movie truly representative of his immense talents.....
The Narrow Margin
(1952)
One of the best B movies ever...
17 April 2003
The Narrow Margin is excellent. It's too bad more of our new directors have forgotten how to make a great film with a minimal budget, using instead inventive camera angles, good characters and dialog, and some surprises along the way. I really loved Marie Windsor as the mobster's wife who's going to LA to sing to the Grand Jury. She's one of the toughest broads I've ever seen! Charles McGraw does his standard tough cop role and turns in a performance that sets the standard by which all others are judged.
This is the original, and beats the heck out of the re-make.....
This is the original, and beats the heck out of the re-make.....
Reindeer Games
(2000)
After the roaches in the jello scene, it's all downhill...
15 April 2003
My nomination for Worst Film of 2000 (of those that I actually saw). It drags and the entire premise is ludicrous - there's not much else to say. After a good laugh in the prison mess hall scene, I quickly lost all interest. Ebert's 1 1/2 stars was VERY generous, and it's sad to see a great director like Frankenheimer involved with something as bad as this.....
Hilarious! Bizarre! Surreal!
1 April 2003
This is one of the craziest things I've ever seen. A beatnik lives on a raft with bathroom furnishings. He sits in the tub typing on toilet paper, which he files in the toilet. A feminine hand appears from the drain, he paints one nail, and it leaves. He opens the medicine cabinet and finds a guy shaving on the other side. "Close the door, dammit!" are the only words in the whole thing. Finally the raft is torpedoed by a toy sub and sinks.
Watch it if you ever get a chance!
Watch it if you ever get a chance!
Alcatraz Express
(1960 TV Movie)
Part of the great "Untouchables" series...
11 March 2003
This is the second feature length Untouchables release, along with "Scarface Mob". Starring Robert Stack as Eliot Ness and his boys, they must oversee the transfer of Al Capone from the Federal Pen in Atlanta to the Rock. Neville Brand has always been my favorite screen Al Capone. He's colorful and as entertaining as always in this film. If you're a fan of the original series, be sure to watch this if you get a chance.
Back in the U.S.S.R.
(1992)
Not the real Moscow...
9 February 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Having spent some time in Moscow as an exchange student, and being very fluent in the language, I was interested in "Back in the USSR" even if it was already "Russia" by the time it was released. It was pretty lame, despite the appearance of Roman Polanski. Just in case anyone didn't already know, the old car (a ZIM) that the one guy drove is very rare it's extremely unlikely someone like him would have one.
It would have helped if the director could have learned a little Russian. There's one scene where Whaley runs down the street beneath a very prominent sign saying "Tualet" - toilet.
This is a possible spoiler, so beware:
After been shot in the hand by Polanski, Whaley acts as if it's nothing by the end of the movie, despite the lack of any real medical attention. Oh well, I'm always looking for details like that...
It would have helped if the director could have learned a little Russian. There's one scene where Whaley runs down the street beneath a very prominent sign saying "Tualet" - toilet.
This is a possible spoiler, so beware:
After been shot in the hand by Polanski, Whaley acts as if it's nothing by the end of the movie, despite the lack of any real medical attention. Oh well, I'm always looking for details like that...
The Long Good Friday
(1980)
All time great gangster movie!
4 February 2003
The Long Good Friday will go down, or should, as one of the all time great gangster movies. Bob Hoskins' portrayal of Harold Shands, boss of London, ranks with Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Edward G. Robinson, Jimmy Cagney, Rober De Niro or Joe Pesci. He epitomizes the screen gangster, with colorful language, an explosive temper, street smarts, but a vulnerability that is not always seen in other gangster roles.
His wife, played by Helen Mirren, is tough in her own way, yet never loses her feminine touch. However, we sense they're both haunted by demons, as if they know some day they'll pay the ultimate price for their misdeeds. Razors, or as the youth of the day call him, "The Human Spirograph", is one of the most menacing bodyguards I've ever seen.
The accents are a bit hard to understand at points to those of us here in the US ('ands across the ocean!), but it adds to the authenticity and helps make this movie stand out from the typical Hollywood gangster film. I do share other criticisms of the dated early 80's music, but it helps to place the movie in the period where it takes place.
Harold can't accept that those who seek to remove him play by a different set of rules and are motivated not by criminal aspirations as he is, but by politics and ideology. This is admittedly an oversimplification of a very complex situation, but it helps explain why he's destined to fail in a world that's changing beyond the limits he's been comfortable with for years.
I saw this movie on its first run in San Francisco, bought the tape when it became available, and now have it on DVD. It's still my favorite Hoskins role. If you get a chance, watch out for George Harrison's comments on this movie. His company, Handmade Films, produced it, and he stated he wouldn't have accepted the project had he known how violent it would turn out to be. The violence, however, isn't gratuitous. As Harold says, "he never hurt no one, well, only when it was necessary. He was always clean about it."
It makes a great pair with "The Krays", by the way....
His wife, played by Helen Mirren, is tough in her own way, yet never loses her feminine touch. However, we sense they're both haunted by demons, as if they know some day they'll pay the ultimate price for their misdeeds. Razors, or as the youth of the day call him, "The Human Spirograph", is one of the most menacing bodyguards I've ever seen.
The accents are a bit hard to understand at points to those of us here in the US ('ands across the ocean!), but it adds to the authenticity and helps make this movie stand out from the typical Hollywood gangster film. I do share other criticisms of the dated early 80's music, but it helps to place the movie in the period where it takes place.
Harold can't accept that those who seek to remove him play by a different set of rules and are motivated not by criminal aspirations as he is, but by politics and ideology. This is admittedly an oversimplification of a very complex situation, but it helps explain why he's destined to fail in a world that's changing beyond the limits he's been comfortable with for years.
I saw this movie on its first run in San Francisco, bought the tape when it became available, and now have it on DVD. It's still my favorite Hoskins role. If you get a chance, watch out for George Harrison's comments on this movie. His company, Handmade Films, produced it, and he stated he wouldn't have accepted the project had he known how violent it would turn out to be. The violence, however, isn't gratuitous. As Harold says, "he never hurt no one, well, only when it was necessary. He was always clean about it."
It makes a great pair with "The Krays", by the way....
Swordfish
(2001)
Very enjoyable, with an original spin
30 January 2003
While some may want to dismiss this movie as a typical cyber-thriller about hackers and government agents, I found it to be above average and very watchable. Some have also accused it of having heavy sexual content, but in reality there's only one scene in which a sex act takes place, and it's without nudity. Halle Berry does appear sans top in one other scene, but no sex is involved and in a R rated movie it's not to be unexpected. That being said, it's not a film for the entire family.
There are some violent scenes, but once again, Swordfish does not pretend to be a family feature. The opening scene is particularly good, and the final chase has a new slant. That alone is unique, for how many times have you seen anything original in chase scenes?
I've read elsewhere there really was an operation Swordfish, so there may actually be some authenticity buried in this movie. I should add that I'm not the biggest Travolta fan, but he's very good in this...
There are some violent scenes, but once again, Swordfish does not pretend to be a family feature. The opening scene is particularly good, and the final chase has a new slant. That alone is unique, for how many times have you seen anything original in chase scenes?
I've read elsewhere there really was an operation Swordfish, so there may actually be some authenticity buried in this movie. I should add that I'm not the biggest Travolta fan, but he's very good in this...
Ultimately disappointing
26 January 2003
I had high hopes for this movie, but I'm sorry to say they were not met. It seemed to have trouble deciding if it was a comedy, a drama or something else. Other movies have walked this tightrope much better. It was competently directed, and Clooney created some good shots, but it failed to draw me or my companion into the plot. We found it hard to really care for the characters. I doubt I will bother to watch it again when it makes it to cable/satellite....
Bowling for Columbine
(2002)
More serious than previous Michael Moore films
20 January 2003
I finally got to see Bowling tonight (the marquee said "Bowling of Columbine"). It started off with Moore's trademark mix of serious political commentary and humor, but as it moved on it became more grave in tone, making several interesting points and raising some very disturbing questions.
Some have criticized him for playing loose with the facts, but these overlook the important questions it asks. It's particularly relevant in these days of impending war with Iraq.
Some have criticized him for playing loose with the facts, but these overlook the important questions it asks. It's particularly relevant in these days of impending war with Iraq.
The Sum of All Fears
(2002)
Best of the Jack Ryan movies so far
20 January 2003
I'm not a huge fan of Clancy's Jack Ryan movies, but this one is the best I've seen so far. I usually watch them when the come on TV, but I got the DVD for this and have enjoyed it every time I've watched it. Some have criticized its plot as being somewhat out of sync with current events, but I found it to be very plausible - perhaps TOO plausible for comfort.
I would make a few changes, however. Mainly, rather than reprise Jack Ryan as a younger man, why not simply introduce another character? The nuclear explosion scene is chilling in its realism.
I would make a few changes, however. Mainly, rather than reprise Jack Ryan as a younger man, why not simply introduce another character? The nuclear explosion scene is chilling in its realism.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence
(2001)
Uneven and depressing
23 November 2002
Spielberg's vision of the future contains some great scenes, particularly the Flesh Fair and Rouge City, but ultimately it resorts to classic Spielberg sentimentality. The ending drags on interminably; the last 30 minutes could have been left off and would not have been missed. The visuals are good, but that's about it.....
The Last Castle
(2001)
New contender for most improbable plot.
17 October 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I just finished watching "The Last Castle" on satellite and must admit I've had an easier time suspending my disbelief in other movies. I'll get straight to the point. The premise of a highly decorated war hero Army general being sent to (presumably) Leavenworth military prison is, at the least, a bit unlikely. Much more likely is that he'd have been allowed to retire. But this is Robert Redford and he's got Principles (not to mention being a loose cannon)!
Now, it's hard to get to the top of the heap in the military by not knowing how to play the game and by choosing one's battles very carefully (at least political ones). But then if the producers had been that realistic, the movie would never have been made. So the great general goes to prison, drawing from his 6 years in the Hanoi Hilton. What does he do? He starts leading the troops, er, excuse me, "prisoners", because there are no soldiers among the inmates, and no rank, etc. etc.
A military prison would not be that much different from a civilian one. The major difference is that the inmates of the former were convicted of committing crimes while serving in the military. That means you'd have your share of thieves, murderers, sexual predators and other assorted sociopaths. It seems, however, that the producers of "The Last Castle" thought otherwise. Why these are men who are just in need of a charismatic leader to whip them into shape.
Well, I think I've made my point. The great general manages to inspire these thieves, murderers, etc., to achieve real greatness. Oh yes, there's the warden, played by Tony Soprano, er, James Gandolfini. I have to confess that I couldn't keep from thinking about "The Sopranos" every time I saw him. I also couldn't help wishing I were watching that instead of "The Last Castle".
The final sequence is so far-fetched that it borders on the ludicrous.
Potential Spoiler Alert!
It really crossed the line when a guy climbs up a chain and manages to enter into a helicopter and SINGLEHANDEDLY overpowers the door-gunner and pilot. He then slams the tail into a tower and survives the subsequent crash landing. This would have worked in a "Die Hard" movie with good ol' Bruce Willis, but not in a movie that takes itself far too seriously. Well, at least he was a helicopter pilot in the Army.
Add to that an embarrassing assortment of clichés, rousing music, a gratuitous scene with the alienated daughter, and you have it, a solid 2 star movie. I only give it that because at least it was competently produced. I have satellite, so these movies are repeated quite frequently. However, this is one I will NOT be tuning into even if there's virtually nothing else to watch. I'd rather take a nap, read a book, go shopping, do just about anything than sit through this one again....
Now, it's hard to get to the top of the heap in the military by not knowing how to play the game and by choosing one's battles very carefully (at least political ones). But then if the producers had been that realistic, the movie would never have been made. So the great general goes to prison, drawing from his 6 years in the Hanoi Hilton. What does he do? He starts leading the troops, er, excuse me, "prisoners", because there are no soldiers among the inmates, and no rank, etc. etc.
A military prison would not be that much different from a civilian one. The major difference is that the inmates of the former were convicted of committing crimes while serving in the military. That means you'd have your share of thieves, murderers, sexual predators and other assorted sociopaths. It seems, however, that the producers of "The Last Castle" thought otherwise. Why these are men who are just in need of a charismatic leader to whip them into shape.
Well, I think I've made my point. The great general manages to inspire these thieves, murderers, etc., to achieve real greatness. Oh yes, there's the warden, played by Tony Soprano, er, James Gandolfini. I have to confess that I couldn't keep from thinking about "The Sopranos" every time I saw him. I also couldn't help wishing I were watching that instead of "The Last Castle".
The final sequence is so far-fetched that it borders on the ludicrous.
Potential Spoiler Alert!
It really crossed the line when a guy climbs up a chain and manages to enter into a helicopter and SINGLEHANDEDLY overpowers the door-gunner and pilot. He then slams the tail into a tower and survives the subsequent crash landing. This would have worked in a "Die Hard" movie with good ol' Bruce Willis, but not in a movie that takes itself far too seriously. Well, at least he was a helicopter pilot in the Army.
Add to that an embarrassing assortment of clichés, rousing music, a gratuitous scene with the alienated daughter, and you have it, a solid 2 star movie. I only give it that because at least it was competently produced. I have satellite, so these movies are repeated quite frequently. However, this is one I will NOT be tuning into even if there's virtually nothing else to watch. I'd rather take a nap, read a book, go shopping, do just about anything than sit through this one again....
Pearl Harbor
(2001)
A veritable encyclopedia of clichés...
17 October 2002
Now, in one movie, every possible war movie cliché ever made! "Just get me into a darn plane!"
I did like the scene when the Zeros fill the sky on their way to the attack. If you want to see something worth seeing, watch "Tora Tora Tora". It's much better, even if it is a bit dated....
I did like the scene when the Zeros fill the sky on their way to the attack. If you want to see something worth seeing, watch "Tora Tora Tora". It's much better, even if it is a bit dated....
Panic in the Streets
(1950)
"I want that money!" . . . "We'll get it, Blackie!"
28 August 2002
Blackie, played by Jack Palance at his most evil, menacing role ever, and the fawning sidekick Fitch, played by the great Zero Mostel, are trying to find out why the cops are so interested in finding who killed their partner Poldi's cousin.
"I got a hunch he brung somethin' in with him," deduces Blackie.
Later, as Poldi is dying of pneumonic plague, of which his cousin would have died had Blackie not shot him (don't worry, I'm not giving anything away), they try to find out what it was.
"You're sick Poldi, real sick. You need a doc. You need a doc bad. But it's gonna take dough, a whole lotta dough," he says as he starts to move his hands around his throat. "Now WHERE'S THE STUFF, POLDI, WHERE'S THE STUFF?", by now strangling him.
"Whats going on here?" asks public health nurse who's been summoned by Poldi's mother.
"We're his best friends," replies Fitch.
This is a great movie. Widmark is really good, too, but he doesn't have the best lines. I've seen it at least 15 times and still enjoy it. Don't miss it...
"I got a hunch he brung somethin' in with him," deduces Blackie.
Later, as Poldi is dying of pneumonic plague, of which his cousin would have died had Blackie not shot him (don't worry, I'm not giving anything away), they try to find out what it was.
"You're sick Poldi, real sick. You need a doc. You need a doc bad. But it's gonna take dough, a whole lotta dough," he says as he starts to move his hands around his throat. "Now WHERE'S THE STUFF, POLDI, WHERE'S THE STUFF?", by now strangling him.
"Whats going on here?" asks public health nurse who's been summoned by Poldi's mother.
"We're his best friends," replies Fitch.
This is a great movie. Widmark is really good, too, but he doesn't have the best lines. I've seen it at least 15 times and still enjoy it. Don't miss it...
The Scarface Mob
(1959 TV Movie)
Brutal, Violent, Great Fun
3 February 2002
Unlike the DePalma picture of the late 80's, this original pilot film for the Untouchables TV show features great performances and really conveys the look and feel of Prohibition era Chicago. Well, it makes you feel as if you were there, whether or not it's all that accurate. Robert Stack once said he didn't so much act as react to the colorful gangsters of the show.
My favorite is Neville Brand, who plays Scarface Al Capone. He's a riot to watch, particularly in the scene where he's berating his lieutenants one moment, then laughing lasciviously the next. Bruce Gordon is Frank Nitti, "The Enforcer". He's crude and brutal, all in all the perfect villain. Watch for the scene where he's working over one of his boys because he can't get Ness and his crew to play ball. Each blow is accented by a musical flourish, while the unlucky victim of his rage sobs and cries out "mama mia! mama mia!".
The TV show dispensed with the Hollywood Italian accents. I can't say whether they'd be offensive to the average Italian-American viewer or not. I do know that the Chicago Outfit, or mob, didn't like it. They went to far as to put a contract on Desi Arnaz, whose studio, Desilu, produced the series. Needless to say, it was never filled.
This will always be one of my favorite gangster films. It's not on the same level as The Godfather, Casino or Goodfellas, Key Largo or Scarface, but it's just as entertaining. It gets a solid Three Stars in my book...
My favorite is Neville Brand, who plays Scarface Al Capone. He's a riot to watch, particularly in the scene where he's berating his lieutenants one moment, then laughing lasciviously the next. Bruce Gordon is Frank Nitti, "The Enforcer". He's crude and brutal, all in all the perfect villain. Watch for the scene where he's working over one of his boys because he can't get Ness and his crew to play ball. Each blow is accented by a musical flourish, while the unlucky victim of his rage sobs and cries out "mama mia! mama mia!".
The TV show dispensed with the Hollywood Italian accents. I can't say whether they'd be offensive to the average Italian-American viewer or not. I do know that the Chicago Outfit, or mob, didn't like it. They went to far as to put a contract on Desi Arnaz, whose studio, Desilu, produced the series. Needless to say, it was never filled.
This will always be one of my favorite gangster films. It's not on the same level as The Godfather, Casino or Goodfellas, Key Largo or Scarface, but it's just as entertaining. It gets a solid Three Stars in my book...
The Untouchables
(1987)
Another embarrassing picture...
1 February 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I am a great fan of the original Untouchables TV series. While it was largely fiction, it was entertaining, had some memorable villains and lots of great actors (er, Special Guest Stars), like William Bendix, Nehemiah Persoff and Claire Trevor, just to name a few. I'd heard somewhere that the '87 DePalma movie was supposed to be more realistic and closer to fact. Well, I heard wrong. There might be a spoiler or two in here, just in case you haven't seen it.
My first criticism is a technical one. Near the beginning there are a lot of close-ups on Eliot Ness and his wife as they move about their house. I found this to go on for too long and it made me feel claustrophobic. The opening scene with Robert DeNiro as Al Capone was a complete rip-off from an earlier scene in the great "Key Largo". Like Johnny Rocco (played by my favorite actor, Edward G. Robinson), Capone is getting a shave. It was okay, I guess. Maybe if I'd have know what was coming later I'd have disliked it more.
Speaking of rip-offs, there's a later scene that features a shoot out on a staircase, complete with a woman pushing a baby carriage. This is STRAIGHT out of Film History 101: the Odessa Steps scene in "Potemkin", by Sergei Eisenstein. Okay, it was well done, and it could be excused. I'm not sure that many casual moviegoers would be aware of it or even care.
But then there's the Canadian Border scene, in which our heroes raid a convoy of bootleggers on horseback. So good so far. Soon the inevitable gunfight erupts. The air is thick with bullets. Maybe these horses were possessed of magical powers. They either dodge the bullet saturated air or the bullets pass right through them. I guess that's why they use blanks. I tried to sink down low in the chair in case anyone I knew might see me. This was where I realized I'd been suckered into yet another summer film for kids out of school.
There's a final point. At the end of the movie (big spoiler here), Ness gets into a fight with the evil Frank Nitti. He puts up a mighty struggle, but finally Ness gets the upper hand and tosses Nitti off the roof, presumably to his death. Okay, maybe it's not that big a spoiler since we all know Ness is going to win in the end.
There's a slight problem with this scene. Nitti, the real Frank Nitti, was NEVER thrown off a roof. In real life he committed suicide after he was convicted and sentenced to prison. So much for the movie being more true to fact.
I was also disappointed to see Sean Connery get an Academy Award for this. He's done many better films, but I guess the Academy members felt he was due an award and this was the only film he was in that year. He was probably the best thing in this movie, but the rest of it was so predictable that it was too much for his performance to overcome.
If you want to see a much better movie, try to find the original Untouchables pilot, "Scarface Mob". It has another of my all time favorite actors, Neville Brand, as Scarface Al Capone, Bruce Gordon as Frank "The Enforcer" Nitti and Robert Stack as Eliot Ness. Their performances are excellent. Here's a bit of trivia: The Chicago Outfit actually put a contract on Desi Arnaz, whose Desilu Studios produced the original Untouchables, because they didn't like how Frank Nitti was portrayed. I doubt the later version managed to evoke such a response, except perhaps by dissatisfied viewers....
My first criticism is a technical one. Near the beginning there are a lot of close-ups on Eliot Ness and his wife as they move about their house. I found this to go on for too long and it made me feel claustrophobic. The opening scene with Robert DeNiro as Al Capone was a complete rip-off from an earlier scene in the great "Key Largo". Like Johnny Rocco (played by my favorite actor, Edward G. Robinson), Capone is getting a shave. It was okay, I guess. Maybe if I'd have know what was coming later I'd have disliked it more.
Speaking of rip-offs, there's a later scene that features a shoot out on a staircase, complete with a woman pushing a baby carriage. This is STRAIGHT out of Film History 101: the Odessa Steps scene in "Potemkin", by Sergei Eisenstein. Okay, it was well done, and it could be excused. I'm not sure that many casual moviegoers would be aware of it or even care.
But then there's the Canadian Border scene, in which our heroes raid a convoy of bootleggers on horseback. So good so far. Soon the inevitable gunfight erupts. The air is thick with bullets. Maybe these horses were possessed of magical powers. They either dodge the bullet saturated air or the bullets pass right through them. I guess that's why they use blanks. I tried to sink down low in the chair in case anyone I knew might see me. This was where I realized I'd been suckered into yet another summer film for kids out of school.
There's a final point. At the end of the movie (big spoiler here), Ness gets into a fight with the evil Frank Nitti. He puts up a mighty struggle, but finally Ness gets the upper hand and tosses Nitti off the roof, presumably to his death. Okay, maybe it's not that big a spoiler since we all know Ness is going to win in the end.
There's a slight problem with this scene. Nitti, the real Frank Nitti, was NEVER thrown off a roof. In real life he committed suicide after he was convicted and sentenced to prison. So much for the movie being more true to fact.
I was also disappointed to see Sean Connery get an Academy Award for this. He's done many better films, but I guess the Academy members felt he was due an award and this was the only film he was in that year. He was probably the best thing in this movie, but the rest of it was so predictable that it was too much for his performance to overcome.
If you want to see a much better movie, try to find the original Untouchables pilot, "Scarface Mob". It has another of my all time favorite actors, Neville Brand, as Scarface Al Capone, Bruce Gordon as Frank "The Enforcer" Nitti and Robert Stack as Eliot Ness. Their performances are excellent. Here's a bit of trivia: The Chicago Outfit actually put a contract on Desi Arnaz, whose Desilu Studios produced the original Untouchables, because they didn't like how Frank Nitti was portrayed. I doubt the later version managed to evoke such a response, except perhaps by dissatisfied viewers....
Tell Your Friends