Change Your Image
Cinemaginarium
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Sibling Rivalry (1990)
A remarkable forgettable film by Carl Reiner
I re-watched this film recently because it was directed by Carl Reiner. I knew that I had seen it before on VHS, but I couldn't remember a thing about the plot - or even if I liked it or not. I assumed that I must have liked it, because Carl Reiner directed some of my favourite movies from the late 1970s and.early 1980s: The Jerk (1979), Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid (1982) and The Man with Two Brains (1983).
After rewatching 'Sibling Rivalry' I understood why I didn't remember any plot details; the film turned out to be utterly forgettable. It clocked in at not even 90 minutes and.it was bookended by a voice-over by Kirstie Alley at the beginning and the end, explaining the main plot points instead of showing them. Perhaps they should have given that task to Sam Elliott or another member of the promising cast (Carrie Fisher, Bill Pullman, Scott Bakula, Ed O'Neill). After all, Kirstie Alley's strongest asset isn't her voice...
The re-watch didn't give me a lot of enjoyment - but it DID make me realise something. The reason that I loved those 3 earlier 'Carl Reiner' films I mentioned might have been mostly due to the fact that they al had Steve Martin on top form in a starring role.
Ah well - live and learn...
The 6th Day (2000)
The Tears of a Clone
THE PLOT: Adam Gibson (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and Hank Morgan (Michael Rapaport) are helicopter pilots in a not-too-distant future where cloning of pets is possible at 'RePet'. However, the practice is not yet widely accepted in society. Human cloning is said to be impossible (and even illegal) because 'human brains are much too complicated'. Or are they? Apparently not so much with Arnold Schwarzenegger's brain, because after an identity mix-up he finds out that he has been cloned.
THE PLAYERS: This film is an obvious Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle, so most of the other actors remain in the background, where they belong. There are a few familiar faces providing support, with Michael Rapaport and Michael Rooker doing most of the heavy lifting. The role of Robert Duvall is little more than a cameo.
THE PLEASURES: Apart from the central premise, most of the 'science fiction' is hidden in background and on view screens and displays. That's also where the writers have hidden much of the humour in the film - not unlike that in 1990's 'Total Recall'. There are also plenty of quotable quips, like 'Doesn't anybody stay dead anymore?'. The icing on the cake is a scene where the filmmakers use visual trickery to make it seem like there are two Arnolds, trying to out-act each other.
THE PHILOSOPHY: The third installment of Arnold Schwarzenegger's 'Days' trilogy (after 1991's 'Judgement Day' and 1999's 'End of Days') deals with issues like identity, humanity and morality, just like the earlier films.
THE POINTS: 64 points - An enjoyable futuristic romp that could have been made in the 1980s.
3:10 to Yuma (2007)
Strict morals and time tables in an otherwise very wild west
THE PLOT: Within the first 10 minutes of the film we have already witnessed the burning of a ranch and a stage coach robbery. Soon, the victim of the first crime (rancher Christian Bale) and the perpetrator of the second (outlaw Russell Crowe) have their first confrontation - and many more will follow during the two hours running time of the film. The main storyline unfolds slowly, but before boredom can rear its ugly head something happens that pulls the plot forward.
THE PLAYERS: The two main roles are played quite well by Russell Crowe and Christian Bale. However, the real pleasure is the performance of Ben Foster, playing gunslinger Charlie Prince. Some 'bad guys' need some time before you really hate their guts, but Ben only needs seconds. Also collecting paychecks: Peter Fonda, Luke Wilson and Kevin Durand.
THE PLEASURES: Excellent pacing and beautiful cinematography - with a great build-up to the final shoot-out. The film is sprinkled with occasional wit and a musical homage to Sergio Leone.
THE POINTS: 75 - a measured blend of traditional western stylings and modern sensibilities.
All In: The Fight for Democracy (2020)
A political pamphlet rather than a 'documentary'
While I personally agree that all adults should be able to vote in a true democracy, this 'documentary' probably did a very poor job convincing those who hold a different opinion.
I watched this right after "13th" (2016), which was a far superior documentary IMHO. That film relied less on talking (political) heads and offered a more balanced investigation of its subject - and more facts that might help viewers form or adjust an opinion.
The IMDb ratings for this film are mostly either '1' or '10'. This suggests that many reviewers rated this film based on their own political convictions rather than on its qualities as a documentary. This makes one wonder if polarization and a two party system might not be even bigger problems for a working democracy than voter suppression.
Bellingcat: Truth in a Post-Truth World (2018)
Ironically, most of the title is misleading
Putting too much 'message' in a documentary can be a dangerous thing, but after watching this I've learned that the opposite may be even worse.
Given that the phrase 'post-truth' is part of the title, I expected this phenomenon to at least be addressed at some level in this doc. Unfortunately, it is not - it isn't even mentioned once. Instead, we are treated to a fairly disjointed collection of heads talking about some aspects of the Bellingcat investigative platform and some of their investigations without ever getting the full picture. There are some interesting snippets of information, but no apparent point or conclusion. In the end, this feels more like a project a film student might have shot for a local TV station; mildly diverting but not particularly insightful.
If you'd like to learn more about 'truth' and information in the modern media landscape, 'The Social Dilemma' (2020) has much more to say.
2 Guns (2013)
Just like '100 Rifles' (1966), the title provides just a rough estimate...
THE PLOT: We are introduced to Bobby (Denzel Washington) and Stig (Mark Wahlberg) bantering in a diner, apparently preparing to 'heist' the bank across the street. However, unbeknownst to each other, both are working undercover - for the American police and military respectively. Their heist seems to be a smashing success, but the fact that the loot of the bank robbery is much larger than expected quickly becomes a problem. This is just the first of a long series of twists, turns and double crosses.
THE PLAYERS: Marky Mark already teamed up with director Baltasar Kormákur for 2012's 'Contraband', and here Denzel Washington is added to the mix to provide Marky with a (reluctant) buddy. The pairing of Denzel and Marky Mark works better than I expected, adding a zesty freshness to the proceedings. Edward James Olmos and Bill Paxton provide excellent counter play as two memorable 'bad guys', while Fred Ward is not quite as good as another bad guy.
THE PLEASURES: The diner scene at the beginning, the banter of the leads and the criminal goings-on reminded me of an early, funnier Quentin Tarrantino film. This effort doesn't quite reach the same levels, but it's an above-average flick somewhere in that murky area between action, bromance, buddy cop and crimedy. The snappy dialogue and plot twists lift it comfortably above average.
THE POINTS: 71 - Solid and funny at times; a 'spectacle' with plenty of twists & turns.