rpniew Reviews

Jessica Darling's It List (2016)

Has its charms

[5/10 · 4 October 2018]

It's not particularly realistic, and has all the depth of a lame Disney Channel sitcom, but the film is not without its charms. The direction is fast-paced and dedicated to the telling of the story, and the perfomers, especially the leads, are talented, age-appropriate (no 30 year-olds posing as teens), and attractive. There are worse ways to waste your time with your kids.

The Mysterious Lady (1928)

Hitchcokian -- very Hitchcockian

[8/10 · 11 August 2009]

This is, quite possibly, the silent film to present to those who are resistant to silent films. First, the characters earn our affection from the very beginning -- scenes of the beautiful Garbo crying during an opera, Nagel becoming entranced by her. Within the first five minutes, you are drawn into them. Garbo becomes more beautiful as the years go by -- we see a beauty that is modern; Garbo would be considered beautiful in the 21st century, unlike many stars from the earlier days. (I mean, could Theda Bara cut it in 2009? Mary MIles Minter? Pola Negri?) Conrad Nagel plays the male lead quietly but effectively -- almost all of the acting here is restrained.

Beyond the beauty of Garbo, one has to really credit Fred Niblo for directing this film. The film is essentially Hitchcock before Hitchcock. This film has elements of "North By Northwest," "The Man Who Knew Too Much," "The Thirty-nine Steps," and, most surprisingly, "Notorious." You have the "wrong man" theme, the guilty, obsessive love, the elegant, tricky villain, the conflicted heroine, Hicthcockian camera movements, some unexpected plot twists, some scenes of real suspense, and even a darkly humorous bit toward the end regarding a corpse.

Very nicely done.

The Boy and the Pirates (1960)

another "Family Classics" memory

[5/10 · 28 September 2008]

This is another film that was regularly shown on the Chicago-area television program "Family Classics," remembered fondly on other posted for other films ("Snowfire" and "Journey to the Beginning of Time," to name a couple.) I am certain that re-watching it at my age would be a real mistake; even though it makes the occasional TCM appearance, I think I'll pass on it. But when I was six, boy, what a film! I looked forward to it every year. The old WGN, in it's pre-superstation days, was a haven for fans of movies, classic and otherwise, between Frazier Thomas's "Family Classics," the Saturday night "Creature Features," and the Sunday night "When Movies Were Movies." Those were the days when local programming was important. I am thankful to WGN TV for filling my childhood fantasies with these films. For now, Though, with this particular film, I'll let sleeping dogs lie.

A Raisin in the Sun (2008 TV Movie)

Poitier emoted, Diddy twitched

[25 February 2008]

There is nothing wrong with remaking and recasting the Lorraine Hansberry masterwork; we shouldn't pay undue fealty to the original cast. I'm sure Olivier's, Jacobi's, and Branaugh's Hamlet would suffer in comparison to the original Burbage performance. Plays are meant to be inhabited by different people as the generations pass. Therefore, there is nothing wrong, in theory, to the making of this version.

This rendition is superior to the 1989 "American Playhouse" performance, which was poorly paced and largely overacted. The female parts are perfectly cast and performed. The same cannot be said, unfortunately, for the male parts.

P. Diddy, or Sean Combs, or whatever name he is going by these days, simply does not have the acting chops to bring out the complexities of the Walter Younger character. Where Sidney Poitier and, to a lesser extent, Danny Glover, were able to grasp hold of the anger and frustration of the man, Mr. Diddy twitches and frowns. He performs as if a lowered head and furrowed eyebrows are the makings of a great performance. I was reminded of Hayden Christianson taking the complex evil of Darth Vader and turning him into a naughty teenager. Combs plays Walter like a street punk.

Sean Patrick Thomas, as George Murchison, fares a little better. He does what he can with what is essentially a superficial and somewhat stereotyped character.

The greatest error is the miscasting of John Stamos as Lindner. He gives the character a harder, more outwardly racist edge than John Fiedler, who created the role. Stamos drips hatred and prejudice just a little too much -- it is easy to ultimately say no to him just to tick him off. Fiedler, working with Hansberry, had a much better grip on the role -- not a man who is outwardly racist, but as one who is sadly misinformed, ignorant (meaning, simply, not understanding), and afraid. Stamos tries to chew up just a little too much scenery.

David Oyelowo, as Joseph Asagai, is the most well cast male in the film, hitting every note required by the character.

The female cast fares far better. Phylicia Rashad recreates and improves upon the role of Lena Younger, breaking the "Mammy"-isms of the earlier performers. Audra McDonald certainly will not usurp Ruby Dee as the definitive Ruth Younger, but does an excellent job in a part that requires an extreme range of emotion.

The greatest revelation in the film by far is Sanaa Lathan as Beneatha. Beneatha is a key character in the play and is relatively ignored in the original, and not particularly well played in the 1989 version. Playing a character substantially younger than she is in real live, Lathan is able to exhibit the hope, anger, childish "know-it-all" attitude and sadness of a young woman in her position. Unfortunately, the screenwriters chose to omit her lovely, sad second-act monologue about her desire to become a doctor; this section was excised in the original film and restored in the American Playhouse version and should have been present here.

Overall, this is a worthwhile film, but imperfect in many ways.

Five Little Peppers and How They Grew (1939)

Certainly not the book

[6/10 · 31 December 2007]

I remember reading the novel as a child and becoming thoroughly entranced by it. Over the years I remembered it fondly; in the Nineties, when similar-themed films like "The Secret Garden", "A Little Princess", and "Little Women" were released, I thought a film version of this book would fit in nicely. I was unaware that a film version had already been produced. When I saw it listed on TCM a couple of weeks ago, I made a point of getting up early and watching it. I was first shocked to see --- gasp --- a car. Modern clothes (by 30s standards)! Although the film was certainly watchable and had its charm, it was clearly not the book I remembered. Someday someone will film the novel accurately.

The Silver Chalice (1954)

Gloriously stupid

[27 April 2006]

The art direction is horrible. The sets are cheaply done. The cinematography could have been done by a three-year-old. And it has Lorne Greene. All of these are the earmarks of a horrible movie, and it is, in fact, horrible. Yet, frankly, there is something fun about all this. Newman's performance really isn't that bad -- at least give him points for effort -- and Virginia Mayo, probably one of the most underrated actresses of her generation, is miscast but not bad. Add this to Jack Palance's always-watchable scenery-chewing histrionics and you have a classically bad film. This could make a fortune on those midnight movie circuits; it deserves legendary bad film status. And, by the way, who ever told Thomas Costain he could write?

2076 Olympiad (1977)

I vaguely remember this

[24 April 2006]

I think I was at the same preview the other poster attended; it seems there was only one, at Columbia College, where Jim Martin was a teacher. Jim had talents and was a terrific guy but this film was a bit of an embarrassment. Still, I'd like to see it again. Some DVD/Video company could make a few bucks off it and I'm sure Jim wouldn't charge an arm and a leg for the rights (if he has anything to say about it.)In the wake of some classically inferior movies, my memories of the film aren't quite as bad as my experience of watching it. Come on -- is there anybody "in the know" who can get a copy? Maybe some local (Chicago) theater could screen it for old times sake. Actually, it did get a pre-release writeup in Playboy.

The Neptune Factor (1973)

Come on, this is horrible!

[1/10 · 28 March 2006]

Undersea disaster! Submarine is sent to save explorers from over-sized iridescent catfish! This was an absolutely horrible film, basically filmed by combining actors with normal, harmless tropical fish. The budget must have been incredible -- hire lackluster actors (of course, Ernest Borgnine is an exception) and buy a fish tank! If you give it a title reminiscent of Kubrick maybe people will think it's great! Plus we can tie it in with aquarium sales and pet shops! Lots of nice colors but the film was one of the worst ever...and not "fun" bad like "Manos" or "Plan Nine" -- I mean truly bad, boring, stupid, inept...the list goes on and on.

Room 222 (1969–1974)

One of the more realistic depictions of educators

[2 February 2006]

OK, it wasn't perfect, and everything tended to get neatly sealed up at the end of each episode, but I remember episodes of "Room 222" now and it seems to capture what it is like to be a teacher(I am one myself, so I know whereof I speak.) The teachers were realistic, the kids didn't look like they hadn't seen the inside of a high school for years (some of the "teens" in "Boston Public" had receding hairlines) Teachers seemed to have a rotating schedule like in real life (unlike, for example, Kotter, who seemed to fill his day with the same 9 students. Even the aforementioned "Boston Public" seemed to have teachers in front of the same kids all day.

This and the first "Cosby" show were probably the best depictions of school life and the lives of teachers; maybe not because they are so accurate in themselves but because the rest are so far removed from reality.

The Christmas That Almost Wasn't (1966)

You just...had to be there

[21 December 2005]

I have wonderful memories of viewing this film. One of the staples of the Christmas season was the weekend matinées of "The Christmas That Almost Wasn't." I remember seeing it with my mother and brothers; I suspect I have the same nostalgia for it that Whittier expressed for his youth in "Snow-Bound." However, we have to be real: after a 35 year absence, I noticed the film in the TV listings and I practically forced my kids to watch it. It was only then I realized with some disappointment how...well...imperfect...the film was. Part of this was due to a rather awful print and the choppy way the station presented it (the startlingly touching finale involving Prune had been butchered out.) It is a part of our youth; it is probably best it remain there. I still love the film and my memories of the time in which it appeared and the big deal we made out of it; sadly, it just doesn't translate today.

Billy Jack Goes to Washington (1977)

Interesting turn of events

[15 June 2005]

I saw this film in the late '70s at a preview in Oak Brook, Illinois. The movie was pretty well-received and even I was surprised that Billy Jack was a better fit in the old Jimmy Stewart role than I had expected. It wasn't great, but serviceable, and certainly better than THE TRIAL OF BILLY JACK. The film, as mentioned here, was never released, but has come out on DVD. Interested in seeing it again after all these years, I picked it up and was shocked. Normally DVDs have Director's Cut-type things -- more footage, deleted scenes, etc.. In this case Laughlin had cut the crap out of the film. Long scenes that helped the flow of the film and made it less --well, "Billy Jack-ish" had been cut. If Laughlin had used the cut I saw nearly thirty years ago, the film would still have worked. Instead it has become a mess. Come on, Tom, give us the original print.

Blue Car (2002)

Anti-Male Propaganda

[16 November 2004]

I had looked forward to viewing this film. I am a fan of the indie movement, I like bold and daring and original films, I love good acting. As far as the latter was concerned, I was suitably impressed. Every performance in the film is noteworthy and difficult.

However, I had a deeper concern as the film went on. As a male English teacher myself, I began to resent the implication that every teacher who shows an interest in a students work or well-being is a predator. I care deeply about my students and give them my time, before, during, and after school; I do not have sex with them. I don't care to have this film taking on the point of view that I am ready to seduce my students.

I then began to see deeper problems than just the depiction of the teacher; I began to see it as a condemnation of all males. The teacher is a pervert,his son is randy, the male boss is insensitive, Georgia's brother is a criminal, the mother's friend and the father are both ineffectual. To further this thesis, one only need look at the deleted scenes on the DVD -- Ohmigod, there WAS a sensitive, positive male character, but the director couldn't have THAT: his scenes ended up on the cutting-room floor.

I realize young women need to be cautioned about predatory males; I know there is a lot of pain and suffering out there. But let's be real here: this is a horribly, one-sided, negative attack on men in general.

The Godfather Part III (1990)

The Problem

[4 November 2004]

The problem with the film is not with what is included; Michael's last attempt at salvation is certainly a worthwhile theme for the movie and a completely logical one. Personally (SPOILER) I believe he actually attains that salvation: Keeping in mind that the trilogy is immersed in Catholic imagery and doctrine, I will put my neck out and say that the death of his daughter is the penance he pays for his sins, and this is realized in the long, drawn out scream he gives at the end. It seems that even Kay realizes this as she watches him. I would also say that in the concluding scene of the film, with Michael in Sicily as an old man, there is a serene look on his face just before he dies. He has (in terms of the film) come to peace with himself and God. His daughter was the price he paid. I find this a fitting way to end the trilogy. (By the way, I don't think the choice of Sofia Coppola was a bad one. She has a waifish quality and an innocence that Winona Ryder would not have brought to the film.)

However, it is what goes on before that makes this film disjointed. We are to accept this as a continuation of the story, but there are too many things missing. First, and most obviously, the film suffers from Coppola's inability to snag Robert Duvall to play Tom Hagen. George Hamilton is a poor replacement, although to his credit he tries valiantly. Second, although much is made of Vinnie's claim to the family as Sonny's illegitimate son, what about Sonny's multitude of legitimate kids? His widow? What are their positions in the Corleone family? And if they have no positions in the family, at least mention it. Do not pretend that they don't exist. This leads into another problem: Why is Connie so much Vinnie's champion? What about her own kids, who again don't receive as much as a reference in the screenplay. In fact, it is Connie's own son who is the center of the baptism scene in the first film. Wouldn't the irony of her own son now being "baptized" as the new Don make for more interesting fodder? What happened to them? Basically, the film cuts too many ties with the first two films and suffers as a result.

Although it wouldn't happen, I would like to see Coppola treat this film as Pam Ewing's dream and start over.

Garfield: The Movie (2004)

Let's not go overboard

[14 June 2004]

There is an awful lot of negativity in some of the other reviews here, combined with glowing reviews from diehard fans. The film is not perfect; it is little more than a light entertainment, but it exceeded my expectations. I had figured that Garfield's time has passed and that a film would just be a last gasp before Garfield went to comic book heaven. I expected little from the film when I took my daughter to see it and was pleasantly surprised. It doesn't have the sarcasm of the comic at its peak but is a decent enough entertainment; I have doubts that anybody other than Bill Murray (besides, of course Lorenzo Music) could have pulled it off. The movie is worth the admission and is a pleasant enough way to pass the time.

Dazed and Confused (1993)

I don't get it

[17 May 2004]

I am in a rather untenable position here. I agree with all of the positive things said in the other reviews, but the film just does not jell together properly. The party in the woods was real; the hazings, although they did not happen in my experience ( I graduated high school a year before the film takes place) are not unrealistic, and the few glimpses we see of adults are not bad. The hangouts were all there, as was the magical attraction to most events including alcohol. However, there was no underlying theme here; just a series of scenes, all realistic and interesting individually, but not adding up to a cohesive entity. What was the point of all this? There are a few reference to standing up for yourself and wondering what the furture holds, but there was nothing that gave the film a direction. I know it could be argued that the point of the film was that there was no overwhelming direction in these guys' lives, but the film didn't even make that clear.

A few other things just didn't work here: Pink is way too small to be a star quarterback. Come on, now. A scrawny guy like that, wearing a necklace to boot, in a Texas town, just wouldn't be playing football. The Ben Affleck character is real enough, but he is disposed of halfway through the film. Wouldn't his comeuppance have been better placed at the film's climax? The fight scene at the end is pointless -- I know, many drunken fights are pointless, but if you are going to position this at the final 20 minutes of the film it should have some emotional power to it. Also, not trying to seem like a purist here, but NOT EVERYBODY SMOKED POT IN THOSE DAYS. Since it is a heavy influence on this film, one has to compare it to "American Graffiti." That film did have a sense of direction, of meaning, and some astute comments about growing older, maintaining one's sense of innocence, and remembering an era. This film is more aimless. It is possible that it tries a little too hard -- giving a little information about a lot of characters and thereby coming up with nothing, instead of paring down the characters and making us feel a little more sympathy for them. I felt nothing for these characters, in spite of the time-period connection I should have felt.

4 Little Girls (1997)

Very moving

[6 April 2004]

Lee's film does an excellent job of bringing the girls to life. It is very easy to lump the four girls together into one entity, as the "Eyes on the Prize" documentary did, but Spike Lee was able to set them apart as individuals and shows the grief felt by the friends and relatives to this day. However, the documentary seems to tell only about two-thirds of the story. Some of the nitty-gritty details about the bombing and the investigation are quickly summarized in order to bring the film to a quick conclusion. If I didn't know from other sources, I would not have known, for example, the nature of the bomb -- was it set by a timer? Thrown into the church? (I know from news accounts that it was the latter, but you would not have known if you were uninitiated and just learning through this documentary.) There are also questions that come to mind that Lee leaves unanswered: What was the reaction of the white community in the area (I know, for example, that the bombing was certainly not unanimously cheered by the white south)? How was the bombing investigated? What eventually led the investigators to the guilty parties? The story of the 15 year search for the bomber and his accomplices (in fact, the search went on longer than that, even into the year 2001) is an important part of the story. A film as powerful as this should have taken the time to go into every nook and cranny of the story. Yes, it was excellent. Yes, it should have won the Documentary award for that year. Yes, it brought a tear to my eye. But there could have been so much more, and could have made the story that much more powerful.

Great Performances: Our Town (1989) Season Unknown, Episode Unknown

Uneven but generally good adaptation

[6 April 2004]

Penelope Ann Miller is without a doubt the best Emily recorded .. and that is against some pretty heavy competition. Eric Stolz is a little shaky in the beginning; he doesn't play the juvenile George as well as the adolescent George, but it is not an easy part to play. Spalding Gray has his moments as the Stage Manager, but the part should really be played a little more sympathetically -- this is our guide through the play and the town and we should feel an affinity for him. He is too distant and stiff for the part. The underplaying, for a change, of Simon Stimson is a relief and an excellent choice; instead of angry and bitter, he is sad and hopeless -- one feels a bit more sympathetic toward him. The biggest miscalculation in the film is the portrayal of Dr. Gibbs. Wilder did not intend for Dr. Gibbs to be portrayed as small-minded and controlling, and stated as much. Just because Mrs. Gibbs would like to see more of the world does not mean she is a trapped, manipulated housewife. But playing Dr. Gibbs as a man ready to flare up into a temper changes the whole outlook of the play. If people were that cruel and small-minded, why would Emily want to return? (I realize we are talking about George's parents, not Emily's, but it is all part of the overall portrayal of the town.) I am looking for a perfect rendition of the play, and this is not it. (Neither, by the way, is the much-celebrated Paul Newman version, which inexplicably drops entire speeches and comments that are quite important to the play's theme.)

Man's Favorite Sport? (1964)

Satisfying; not great.

[8 August 2003]

Yes, there are variations on "Bringing Up Baby", and, yes, Cary Grant, even at the age he was at the time this film was made, would have been better, but there is certainly something likeable about this film. The locations are nice, and a little different from the average romantic comedy. The plot, although a little shopworn at this point, is handled well and just a little differently from other similar movies. Hudson's performance is a little wooden but serviceable. The film's real saving grace is that Paula Prentiss is in rare form here... she is a little unusual for the female lead (her part at first seems to be the Eve Arden-like wisecracking best friend of the female star and them blossoms into the starring role) and is quite good, setting the tone for the movie -- not quite as manic and driven as Katherine Hepburn in "Bringing Up Baby" (who would today be arrested for stalking) but a little more grounded in reality. This is not by any means Hawks's best, but it is a pleasant time-waster.

Gypsy Girl (1966)

Forgotten and underappreciated film

[28 August 2002]

This is, in fact, a forgotten film (note the absence of a video or DVD) and a largely underappreciated one. I have found on many occasions Mills's Disney films to be very syrupy and cloying; this one proves beyond that shadow of a doubt that she could act. Obviously, her father, who directed the film, had some knowledge of her capabilities. This performance, and the loving, detailed depiction of the British countryside (mentioned in the other user comments) overwhelm any other minor errors in technical knowhow (the sound and cinematography are not the best) and pacing. This is not a perfect film. One could better describe it as a rough, uncut diamond of a film -- and those are the most valuable of all.

Heaven's Gate (1980)

An underrated diamond in the rough

[11 February 2002]

I have no intention of going "revisionist" here and heralding "Heaven's Gate" as some kind of murdered classic -- frankly, much of the film is too formless to rank it with the classics (and another reviewer on this site is thoroughly off the mark by comparing it to Griffith's "Intolerance.") However, this is a film that was just a little too brutally reviewed when it came out -- much of the film and its attention to detail, its awesome cinematography, its social commentary, and a surprisingly strong performance by Kris Kristofferson, make it a very watchable and powerful film. It seems that much of the prejudice against the film was based upon its price tag (small by today's standards, when one thinks of the overrated "Titanic" and the deservedly hated "Waterworld") and some sort of animosity toward Cimono, certainly an imperfect person. I would, however, recommend the film -- it is certainly better than its reputation and is, if not a classic, certainly an honorable achievement.

A Journey to the Beginning of Time (1955)

a Chicago T.V. favorite

[11 January 2002]

I remember the film well. It was an annual event on our local station, and, as far as my friends and I were concerned, a big one. It is amazing how the other comments from the Chicago area identify the series with the show "Garfield Goose." As far as I am concerned, the two are inseparable. For those of you not from the area, you don't know what you missed!