This movie certainly entertains, but a viewer can find it as suspenseful as he does informative, touching, and powerful, given that such a con- artist, who deceived hospital administrators, airline pilots, and lawyers, and made the FBI look unprofessional and foolish, really did exist. Christopher Walken does a commendable job as Frank Abagnale Senior, the failed father who exudes irresponsibility and has a victim's ready excuse for his mistakes. Interesting to see how Frank Abagnale Junior (Leonardo DiCaprio), though he grows to see his father more clearly, deals with his hurt by acting out some of his father's antisocial behavior, becoming that of which he most disapproves in a parent. Frank Abagnale Jr. seems to have found the mentor he would have preferred in Carl Hanratty (Tom Hanks), the determined and ethical FBI agent who finally catches up to the fast-talking fraud.
Reviews
40 Reviews
Parenthood
(2010–2015)
Never a dull moment
2 April 2017
Back in the 1960's some wise sociologists affirmed that weekly television sitcoms and dramas were misleading viewers regarding the struggles one has at home, in school, at work, or about town because the scripts involved tame situations and lead characters were resolving problems with friends, spouses, siblings, and co-workers within only a half hour. In its way Parenthood also deludes the viewer. Within an hour one sees two brothers argue about their failing business, a young separated couple attempt reconciliation, the stubborn family patriarch undergo open-heart surgery, and the confused victim of Asberger's disease go through another outbreak. Because the actors perform very convincingly, whether they express passion, rage, or worry in the face of the unappealing situations that people must unfortunately endure, I have found myself identifying with and even rooting for some of the characters. The makers of Parenthood still don't present life realistically, though. For most of us it often goes by uneventfully.
Jurassic Park
(1993)
Hugely Successful Novel Works Well As A Movie
10 December 2016
Before the smaller, slender, more harmless looking Dilophosaurus turned aggressive, the Tyrannosaurus Rex lived up to its fierce reputation, and Dennis Nedry attempted to make off with the Barbasol can of dinosaur embryos, I had already watched my favorite scene. When Paleontologhist Alan Grant (Sam Neill), and the park creator's grandchildren, Lex and Tim Murphy (Ariana Richards and Joseph Mazzello), first hiked through the park, looking in amazement as herds of swiftly running Gallimimuses, swooping pterodactyls, and plodding brachiosauruses appeared all about them, they reacted so appropriately that the action and suspense that followed felt a little anti-climatic. Astonished and wide-eyed, Lex and Tim Murphy innocently asked questions, and wise Dr. Grant imparted his knowledge when he wasn't shaking his head incredulously each time he saw another enormous, heretofore extinct reptile.
The performances, images, script, and the scenes featuring the rampaging tyranasaurus as it thundered after the jeep or plucked a man from an outhouse toilet, all deserve very high marks. For me and possibly for other viewers, though, who as 8 year-olds had read about the brontosaurus, allosaurus, stegosaurus, and triceratops, and had played and pretended with little plastic versions of them, the makers of Jurassic Park had to present the first human-dinosaur encounter very believably. To me, they did.
The performances, images, script, and the scenes featuring the rampaging tyranasaurus as it thundered after the jeep or plucked a man from an outhouse toilet, all deserve very high marks. For me and possibly for other viewers, though, who as 8 year-olds had read about the brontosaurus, allosaurus, stegosaurus, and triceratops, and had played and pretended with little plastic versions of them, the makers of Jurassic Park had to present the first human-dinosaur encounter very believably. To me, they did.
When a Stranger Calls
(1979)
Pre-Cell Phone Thriller
16 October 2015
As I waited to buy my ticket for "When A Stranger Calls," the promotional poster to the right of me included the words: "Unequivocally, the most frightening movie I have ever seen." The critic who made that concise comment expressed well my own response, and apparently that of the others in attendance, considering the writhing and uncontrolled screaming.
Writers Steve Freke and Fred Walton created suspense and tension very effectively by getting viewers to live through the potential victim by focusing attention, as s/he did, where they shouldn't. The actors, too, did their job to make certain scenes almost too much to tolerate by reacting believably, either with appropriate fear and panic (Colleen Dewhurst and Carol Kane), or with determination, frustration, and vulnerability, in the case of the seasoned but imperfect detective played by Charles Durning.
For the many people who have known life only with phones they can carry in their pocket, When A Stranger Calls may not keep them awake late at night. While they know (but probably take for granted) the incredible capability of an I-Phone, they probably can't imagine the power of a telephone that remained seated on a table or attached to a wall. They don't know what one experiences when he answers a call at 11:30 pm, repeatedly says "hello," but gets something disturbing in return.
Did the menace who called to breathe heavily or mumble unintelligibly pose a real threat? Did he know where the victims lived? Was he calling from just down the street? At least the four walls and locked doors of home made one feel protected... until he saw When A Stranger Calls.
The story didn't clarify how the psychotic prankster could make those phone calls. A person couldn't pick up a telephone, dial that phone's number, and cause another phone in the house to ring. Occasionally, families did maintain more than one telephone number, but the young children in When A Stranger Calls would not likely have needed a line to themselves.
Writers Steve Freke and Fred Walton created suspense and tension very effectively by getting viewers to live through the potential victim by focusing attention, as s/he did, where they shouldn't. The actors, too, did their job to make certain scenes almost too much to tolerate by reacting believably, either with appropriate fear and panic (Colleen Dewhurst and Carol Kane), or with determination, frustration, and vulnerability, in the case of the seasoned but imperfect detective played by Charles Durning.
For the many people who have known life only with phones they can carry in their pocket, When A Stranger Calls may not keep them awake late at night. While they know (but probably take for granted) the incredible capability of an I-Phone, they probably can't imagine the power of a telephone that remained seated on a table or attached to a wall. They don't know what one experiences when he answers a call at 11:30 pm, repeatedly says "hello," but gets something disturbing in return.
Did the menace who called to breathe heavily or mumble unintelligibly pose a real threat? Did he know where the victims lived? Was he calling from just down the street? At least the four walls and locked doors of home made one feel protected... until he saw When A Stranger Calls.
The story didn't clarify how the psychotic prankster could make those phone calls. A person couldn't pick up a telephone, dial that phone's number, and cause another phone in the house to ring. Occasionally, families did maintain more than one telephone number, but the young children in When A Stranger Calls would not likely have needed a line to themselves.
Leave It to Beaver
(1957–1963)
Still Enjoyable
5 February 2014
Citing Leave It To Beaver's strengths, Tony Dow has said that it was the first program of its kind to include episodes dealing with death and divorce. Though I don't doubt Tony Dow's claims about the show that continues to make him recognized, I have never considered Leave It To Beaver a daring sit-com that presents unpleasant and unsettling truths. I don't see it as the forerunner to the openly controversial comedies, such as Maude, The Jefferson's, and All In The Family.
Leave It To Beaver has more in common with The Donna Reed Show, Father Knows Best, and Make Room For Daddy, shows of the same era that also featured families, and made light of differences of opinion and miss-communication between husbands and wives and of the typical struggles between parents and their children, young people and their friends. Leave It To Beaver, however, does a better job than its rivals of presenting, in an entertaining way, middle-class living as many of that era had known it.
Like the other popular television families of that era, the Cleavers resolve their problems promptly, Ward Cleaver disciplines reasonably -- the two boys express dread when they expect their father to holler when he comes to their bedroom to give consequences, but he never really loses control of his anger -- June Cleaver offers her opinion tactfully, and nobody behaves antisocially. The Cleavers have a functional family. They don't, however, come across as a model one.
The other popular sitcoms of the 50's and early 60's either featured characters a little too refined or proper to make viewers easily forget that they are observing actors, or entertained by including buffoonery (Don Knotts, Lucille Ball, and Dick Van Dyke each engaged in the unlikely.). Leave It To Beaver, though, maintained a solid following by presenting predicaments and featuring characters that more closely resembled reality.
The way the makers of Leave It To Beaver portray the most extreme of its cast may serve as the best criteria for rating the show above the others of that time. As the quintessential sycophant, Eddie Haskel keeps me laughing, but he also occasionally reveals fragility behind the phony, cocky exterior. Similarly, Lumpy usually amuses viewers by playing a common type: the insecure teen who teases and bullies his buddy's younger sibling. He puts on innocence, though, in the presence of his overbearing father. Because the audience sees other sides to Eddie and Lumpy -- Leave It To Beaver writers had the astuteness to include them - - they and the show come across as less fictional.
Leave It To Beaver has more in common with The Donna Reed Show, Father Knows Best, and Make Room For Daddy, shows of the same era that also featured families, and made light of differences of opinion and miss-communication between husbands and wives and of the typical struggles between parents and their children, young people and their friends. Leave It To Beaver, however, does a better job than its rivals of presenting, in an entertaining way, middle-class living as many of that era had known it.
Like the other popular television families of that era, the Cleavers resolve their problems promptly, Ward Cleaver disciplines reasonably -- the two boys express dread when they expect their father to holler when he comes to their bedroom to give consequences, but he never really loses control of his anger -- June Cleaver offers her opinion tactfully, and nobody behaves antisocially. The Cleavers have a functional family. They don't, however, come across as a model one.
The other popular sitcoms of the 50's and early 60's either featured characters a little too refined or proper to make viewers easily forget that they are observing actors, or entertained by including buffoonery (Don Knotts, Lucille Ball, and Dick Van Dyke each engaged in the unlikely.). Leave It To Beaver, though, maintained a solid following by presenting predicaments and featuring characters that more closely resembled reality.
The way the makers of Leave It To Beaver portray the most extreme of its cast may serve as the best criteria for rating the show above the others of that time. As the quintessential sycophant, Eddie Haskel keeps me laughing, but he also occasionally reveals fragility behind the phony, cocky exterior. Similarly, Lumpy usually amuses viewers by playing a common type: the insecure teen who teases and bullies his buddy's younger sibling. He puts on innocence, though, in the presence of his overbearing father. Because the audience sees other sides to Eddie and Lumpy -- Leave It To Beaver writers had the astuteness to include them - - they and the show come across as less fictional.
Gangs of New York
(2002)
OK (if you can get through it)
25 July 2013
Those who romanticize the lives of 19th century Americans and maintain Americana images of bustling city streets where innkeepers, aristocratic women carrying parasols, nannies, leather smiths, bankers, cobblers, bricklayers, market managers, and police officers (whose job involved no more risk than chasing down an occasional pickpocket)will have a hard time assimilating this version of U.S history. "Gangs of New York" gives the impression that in 1860's New York City anarchy reigned and the antisocial predominated.
Usually, movies that have characters that I would never want as neighbors also feature ones that I admire or envy, people who endure struggles and make decisions with which I empathize, but not this movie. It doesn't include any character I find likable - not even Leonardo DiCaprio's. I have to concede, however, that my feelings reflect to a degree the quality of the performances, since a viewer can't react with loathing and revulsion if the actors don't make themselves appear heinous and heartless. Daniel Day Lewis's acting, especially, affected me. As much as I wanted to put my arm around the flawed but generally decent man he portrayed in "The Crucible," I was hoping that someone would dismember "The Butcher."
"Gangs of New York" does deal with a very significant social-political issue, the strained relationship between the Irish and the English, but it can also frustrate because it does not teach much. If a viewer can withstand the many brutal killings and stay with the story to the finish, s/he will probably only have learned that when the Irish and English immigrated to this country they brought their mutual hatred with them.
Usually, movies that have characters that I would never want as neighbors also feature ones that I admire or envy, people who endure struggles and make decisions with which I empathize, but not this movie. It doesn't include any character I find likable - not even Leonardo DiCaprio's. I have to concede, however, that my feelings reflect to a degree the quality of the performances, since a viewer can't react with loathing and revulsion if the actors don't make themselves appear heinous and heartless. Daniel Day Lewis's acting, especially, affected me. As much as I wanted to put my arm around the flawed but generally decent man he portrayed in "The Crucible," I was hoping that someone would dismember "The Butcher."
"Gangs of New York" does deal with a very significant social-political issue, the strained relationship between the Irish and the English, but it can also frustrate because it does not teach much. If a viewer can withstand the many brutal killings and stay with the story to the finish, s/he will probably only have learned that when the Irish and English immigrated to this country they brought their mutual hatred with them.
Everybody Loves Raymond
(1996–2005)
Amongst the best sitcoms ever
3 April 2013
When I saw commercials promoting Everyone Loves Raymond back in 1996 as the first episode approached, I had almost no interest in watching it. With that title I expected an uncomplicated show that featured a helpless screw-up whom his family and buddies inevitably forgive because they find him so likable. Since, in addition, Seinfeld and Friends, the most popular comedies of that time, weren't eliciting from me much more than a smile (the few times I watched them), Everybody Loves Raymond didn't have a chance of keeping me entertained. So... I didn't watch Everybody Loves Raymond for the first time until seven years after its ten-year run came to an end.
When I prejudged Everyone Loves Raymond, I did not err entirely with regard to how I imagined Ray Barone, because his blunders do form the hub about which many stories revolve, and his likability does help him transcend the resentments that others could harbor toward him. As for the other aspects of Everyone Loves Raymond, I had them figured wrong. I did not expect, for example, such interesting characters and complex dynamics between them.
Frank Barone, whose chauvinistic attitudes aggravate his wife, lets out a mean-spirited laugh at times, but otherwise has difficulty expressing any emotion other than indignation. Ray Barone, like his father, frustrates Debra, his own wife, and avoids emotions that leave him feeling vulnerable. Marie Barone, while she has no difficulty confronting her boorish husband, never goes so far as to demand that he change his egocentric attitudes. Similarly, Debra, as often as she berates Ray for making choices as if he were the oldest of her four children, inevitably forgives him.
Debra must also contend with her mother-in-law's flippancy and condescension -- though she regularly expresses anger at Ray, she usually stops short of venting rage at Marie -- and her experiences sometimes inspire a camaraderie with Robert, the failed and unfavored older son, whose injured ego thrives on his brother's misfortunes.
Everyone Loves Raymond not only succeeds, though, because each actor plays a challenging part convincingly. Episodes usually include a creative storyline. Many times one person's behavior sets off a chain reaction amongst the other members of the family. Ray may, for example, unintentionally divulge something that he planned to keep secret; his words provoke Debra, who realizes that Ray didn't keep an important agreement; her disappointment incites Marie Barone, so she meddles and rationalizes Raymond's irresponsibility; her actions incite Robert, who takes advantage of the situation by revealing a bigger, more embarrassing truth about his brother.
I don't know what name the creators of Everyone Loves Raymond should have given it: Everyone Prefers Raymond (?) Ray Will Find A Way (?) My Dysfunctional Family (?) A different name may not have convinced me to give the show a try back in 1996, but it would have better suited what I have found to be an entertaining and surprisingly sophisticated situation comedy.
When I prejudged Everyone Loves Raymond, I did not err entirely with regard to how I imagined Ray Barone, because his blunders do form the hub about which many stories revolve, and his likability does help him transcend the resentments that others could harbor toward him. As for the other aspects of Everyone Loves Raymond, I had them figured wrong. I did not expect, for example, such interesting characters and complex dynamics between them.
Frank Barone, whose chauvinistic attitudes aggravate his wife, lets out a mean-spirited laugh at times, but otherwise has difficulty expressing any emotion other than indignation. Ray Barone, like his father, frustrates Debra, his own wife, and avoids emotions that leave him feeling vulnerable. Marie Barone, while she has no difficulty confronting her boorish husband, never goes so far as to demand that he change his egocentric attitudes. Similarly, Debra, as often as she berates Ray for making choices as if he were the oldest of her four children, inevitably forgives him.
Debra must also contend with her mother-in-law's flippancy and condescension -- though she regularly expresses anger at Ray, she usually stops short of venting rage at Marie -- and her experiences sometimes inspire a camaraderie with Robert, the failed and unfavored older son, whose injured ego thrives on his brother's misfortunes.
Everyone Loves Raymond not only succeeds, though, because each actor plays a challenging part convincingly. Episodes usually include a creative storyline. Many times one person's behavior sets off a chain reaction amongst the other members of the family. Ray may, for example, unintentionally divulge something that he planned to keep secret; his words provoke Debra, who realizes that Ray didn't keep an important agreement; her disappointment incites Marie Barone, so she meddles and rationalizes Raymond's irresponsibility; her actions incite Robert, who takes advantage of the situation by revealing a bigger, more embarrassing truth about his brother.
I don't know what name the creators of Everyone Loves Raymond should have given it: Everyone Prefers Raymond (?) Ray Will Find A Way (?) My Dysfunctional Family (?) A different name may not have convinced me to give the show a try back in 1996, but it would have better suited what I have found to be an entertaining and surprisingly sophisticated situation comedy.
Taxi Driver
(1976)
Powerful but flawed
20 November 2012
To fairly review a movie from the 1970's, one must separate elements of that often ridiculed decade, such as fashion, hairstyles, technology, and jargon, from the story and the performances. S/he can't allow the plaid pants; broad-collared shirts; contrived sounding street talk; over-the-ears, less than natural, post-hippie era hair; or even the absence of I-pods and cell phones to keep him/her from directing his/her judgments only at the believability of the movie's plot and the acting.
So... keeping the popular culture of that time in perspective, I think Taxi Driver deserves high marks in part because it helped to make people aware that a soldier usually returns from war (Viet Nam or any other) troubled, not simply relieved that he is no longer experiencing horror and motivated to transfer his work ethic to the home front. The movie reveals, too, that a veteran may not have caring parents and friends and a comfortable home to ease his transition (though the difference between the memories of explosions and screams and the calm of an office or store creates its own special stress); he may have to find his way alone.
Taxi Driver succeeds, too, because of the acting. Robert De Niro, Cybill Shepherd, Jody Foster, Peter Boyle, and Harvey Keitel perform convincingly as the victims, degenerates, and survivors of a depraved New York City subculture. Only the FBI agents come across as a little typed.
Taxi Driver doesn't score high in all areas, however. While the cast impresses, this starkly realistic story actually lacks in realism. In the climatic scene When Travis (Robert De Niro) rescues Iris (Jody Foster), by gunning down the miscreants who exploit her, he has carried out a rehearsed plan (he had purchased several firearms) motivated by an overpowering and unrelated rage as much as he has valiantly acted on his concern for this once innocent girl. The writers, as they should, make Sport (Harvey Keitel) and his buddies look like low-lifes, but when these men rebound growling and screaming from 38-caliber pistol blasts from point blank range they behave like zombies, not humans.
During the outcome phase the less-than-likely events continue. Newspaper recognition of Travis Bickle's act seems plenty appropriate, but a police officer, FBI agent, or common citizen would have probably seen and commented on the similarity between the man in the newspaper photo and the mohawked character who drew attention to himself when he conspicuously fled the plaza where he had considered -- he pulled out a gun for many to see -- killing a senatorial candidate as he spoke to an audience of 500+.
And not long after the newspaper makes the public aware of Bickle's courageous deed, he receives a letter from Iris's parents thanking him for saving their daughter. Like the newspaper story aspects of the letter rate it low on the probability scale. I can understand that such a letter would include the parents' gratitude and feelings of indebtedness toward the person who made possible the girl's return home. I don't accept, though, that the parents would also tell of their daughter's successful readjustment to her school routine and renewal of friendships. After the abuse that Iris weathered and the violence that she witnessed, she would suffer post traumatic stress that would rival that of the Viet Nam veteran's.
So... keeping the popular culture of that time in perspective, I think Taxi Driver deserves high marks in part because it helped to make people aware that a soldier usually returns from war (Viet Nam or any other) troubled, not simply relieved that he is no longer experiencing horror and motivated to transfer his work ethic to the home front. The movie reveals, too, that a veteran may not have caring parents and friends and a comfortable home to ease his transition (though the difference between the memories of explosions and screams and the calm of an office or store creates its own special stress); he may have to find his way alone.
Taxi Driver succeeds, too, because of the acting. Robert De Niro, Cybill Shepherd, Jody Foster, Peter Boyle, and Harvey Keitel perform convincingly as the victims, degenerates, and survivors of a depraved New York City subculture. Only the FBI agents come across as a little typed.
Taxi Driver doesn't score high in all areas, however. While the cast impresses, this starkly realistic story actually lacks in realism. In the climatic scene When Travis (Robert De Niro) rescues Iris (Jody Foster), by gunning down the miscreants who exploit her, he has carried out a rehearsed plan (he had purchased several firearms) motivated by an overpowering and unrelated rage as much as he has valiantly acted on his concern for this once innocent girl. The writers, as they should, make Sport (Harvey Keitel) and his buddies look like low-lifes, but when these men rebound growling and screaming from 38-caliber pistol blasts from point blank range they behave like zombies, not humans.
During the outcome phase the less-than-likely events continue. Newspaper recognition of Travis Bickle's act seems plenty appropriate, but a police officer, FBI agent, or common citizen would have probably seen and commented on the similarity between the man in the newspaper photo and the mohawked character who drew attention to himself when he conspicuously fled the plaza where he had considered -- he pulled out a gun for many to see -- killing a senatorial candidate as he spoke to an audience of 500+.
And not long after the newspaper makes the public aware of Bickle's courageous deed, he receives a letter from Iris's parents thanking him for saving their daughter. Like the newspaper story aspects of the letter rate it low on the probability scale. I can understand that such a letter would include the parents' gratitude and feelings of indebtedness toward the person who made possible the girl's return home. I don't accept, though, that the parents would also tell of their daughter's successful readjustment to her school routine and renewal of friendships. After the abuse that Iris weathered and the violence that she witnessed, she would suffer post traumatic stress that would rival that of the Viet Nam veteran's.
Tootsie
(1982)
A Special Film (in its time)
6 September 2012
The last time I watched Tootsie (early in 2012) I actually came away from the experience feeling a little depressed. No specific scene got me down this time, nor did the behavior or personality of any character. No particular performance disappointed me either. In my eyes the story remained the same. My reaction to Tootsie, however, had definitely changed.
I gave Tootsie a high rating based on the effect the movie had on me the first time I saw it within a few months of its release. The various characters in supporting roles delivered clever lines naturally, Dustin Hoffman played a difficult part convincingly, and the writers presented social issues intelligently. Tootsie received awards and deserved them.
Older movies don't show their age all at once. As a story about actors and acting, television production and direction, scripts and improvisation, Tootsie has not lost any appeal. As a story about romance, it hasn't become entirely dated either.
Because the nature of relationships (despite the communication afforded by cell phones and computers) between men and women has evolved little since Tootsie -- many men still pursue women for sex, and women live to regret their choices -- Sandy's (Terri Garr) overly accommodating approach and frustrations regarding Michael Dorsey (Dustin Hoffman) and Ron's (Dabney Coleman) macho style in his less than ethical romance with Julie (Jessica Lange) remain relevant. Michael Dorsey's astute words at the end of the film, in fact, when he tells Julie in a final effort to win her over that he knows much better now how to treat women because he has lived as one, still sound profound.
I don't consider women's struggles to gain understanding and respect from men, whether in social, professional, or political settings, then, as an issue that has had its time, but I do think that humorous films that feature men who carry on double lives by dressing and conducting themselves as women have lost much of their power to suspend disbelief.
I gave Tootsie a high rating based on the effect the movie had on me the first time I saw it within a few months of its release. The various characters in supporting roles delivered clever lines naturally, Dustin Hoffman played a difficult part convincingly, and the writers presented social issues intelligently. Tootsie received awards and deserved them.
Older movies don't show their age all at once. As a story about actors and acting, television production and direction, scripts and improvisation, Tootsie has not lost any appeal. As a story about romance, it hasn't become entirely dated either.
Because the nature of relationships (despite the communication afforded by cell phones and computers) between men and women has evolved little since Tootsie -- many men still pursue women for sex, and women live to regret their choices -- Sandy's (Terri Garr) overly accommodating approach and frustrations regarding Michael Dorsey (Dustin Hoffman) and Ron's (Dabney Coleman) macho style in his less than ethical romance with Julie (Jessica Lange) remain relevant. Michael Dorsey's astute words at the end of the film, in fact, when he tells Julie in a final effort to win her over that he knows much better now how to treat women because he has lived as one, still sound profound.
I don't consider women's struggles to gain understanding and respect from men, whether in social, professional, or political settings, then, as an issue that has had its time, but I do think that humorous films that feature men who carry on double lives by dressing and conducting themselves as women have lost much of their power to suspend disbelief.
The Andy Griffith Show
(1960–1968)
Simple and Well-acted
19 December 2011
Don Knotts won the Emmy Awards, and deservedly so, but Andy Griffith proved himself to be a more talented and versatile actor than that for which he received credit. Sometime early during the show's 9-year run, the Andy Taylor character changed from the hospitable, happy-go-lucky, extroverted country bumpkin (probably inspired by Andy Griffith's role in the movie "No Time For Sergeants") to the responsible, realistic, and oftentimes reserved middle-aged adult. He continued to show enthusiasm for the simple pleasures afforded by life in small-town North Carolina, such as fishing, his Aunt Bee's cooking, and guitar playing on his front porch, and he still came across as rather informally educated, but he dropped the wackiness.
True, he needed to accommodate Barney Fife, who was dominating the humor with his transparent bravado and pseudo-sophistication, but Andy Griffith did more than provide the sound judgment that kept his bumbling deputy from self-destruction. On the occasion that someone frustrated him more than he could handle, he expressed his exasperation in a believable way, and he presented a very convincing nuanced response -- an affirmative nod of his head and a slight smile -- to confirm when a fellow citizen of Mayberry had learned a valuable life lesson.
That look, in which Andy Taylor expresses more in silence or in a few words than he could with many, brings to mind two distinct episodes, both shown during the final year or two of series. In one, Aunt Bee, supported by members of town's garden club, makes herself a candidate for mayor, and in the other Barney Fife returns (Don Knotts had left the series, and Barney Fife had moved to Mount Pilot) and tells Andy of his supposed accomplishments as a big city detective.
In the story involving Aunt Bee's bid to become mayor of Mayberry, she not only withdraws from the race during a publicly held debate but also comes across as simple-minded, idealistic, unqualified, and just plain foolish (Mayberry folk may have been letting the rest of the nation know that in their minds a woman doesn't belong in public office.). In the episode about Barney's return to Mayberry, he unwittingly enables the family of supermarket thieves living next door to him by divulging where the Mt. Pilot police are planning to make their next stakeout, then finally "solves" the crime with Andy's help.
In one of the shows, the script writers confront a new social issue, and in another they bring back an old formula. What crucial element of the acting do the two have in common? They both include Andy's parental look, the one that says not only that he knows the right course of action but that he has also known it long before the others do.
True, he needed to accommodate Barney Fife, who was dominating the humor with his transparent bravado and pseudo-sophistication, but Andy Griffith did more than provide the sound judgment that kept his bumbling deputy from self-destruction. On the occasion that someone frustrated him more than he could handle, he expressed his exasperation in a believable way, and he presented a very convincing nuanced response -- an affirmative nod of his head and a slight smile -- to confirm when a fellow citizen of Mayberry had learned a valuable life lesson.
That look, in which Andy Taylor expresses more in silence or in a few words than he could with many, brings to mind two distinct episodes, both shown during the final year or two of series. In one, Aunt Bee, supported by members of town's garden club, makes herself a candidate for mayor, and in the other Barney Fife returns (Don Knotts had left the series, and Barney Fife had moved to Mount Pilot) and tells Andy of his supposed accomplishments as a big city detective.
In the story involving Aunt Bee's bid to become mayor of Mayberry, she not only withdraws from the race during a publicly held debate but also comes across as simple-minded, idealistic, unqualified, and just plain foolish (Mayberry folk may have been letting the rest of the nation know that in their minds a woman doesn't belong in public office.). In the episode about Barney's return to Mayberry, he unwittingly enables the family of supermarket thieves living next door to him by divulging where the Mt. Pilot police are planning to make their next stakeout, then finally "solves" the crime with Andy's help.
In one of the shows, the script writers confront a new social issue, and in another they bring back an old formula. What crucial element of the acting do the two have in common? They both include Andy's parental look, the one that says not only that he knows the right course of action but that he has also known it long before the others do.
Kung Fu
(1972–1975)
Surprisingly Good
24 May 2011
When I first watched Kung Fu I expected action and violence, because of the title and the wild west setting, but I didn't anticipate much with respect to a plot. The quality acting, both on the part of David Carridine and just about every character he encountered as he wandered the United States western frontier, pleasantly surprised me. I especially enjoyed the performances of the rough-edged, uncultured types who inevitably lived to regret their decision to test Caine. Without behaving simply as stereotypical outlaws these actors did a great job of making the threats or insolent comments that ultimately resulted in their humiliation at the hands (and feet) of a man that did not seem physically or psychologically capable of harming anyone.
I think that many viewers saw in Caine a person they admired and would like to emulate. He required very little in terms of material possessions to carry on, didn't prejudge those he met (though they sometimes prejudged him), maintained a profound spiritual life yet confronted daunting situations realistically, and possessed superior survival skills in an often less than civilized world. At a time when some people in the U.S. were seeking greater spiritual fulfillment in Eastern philosophies and religions, Caine was serving as something of a role model.
If someone were to recreate the Kung Fu series, viewers would probably expect, if not demand, two changes: 1. A man of Southeast Asian ethnicity would have to play the part of Caine, not a Caucasian, even if, as was the case with David Carridine, his features suggest some Chinese ancestry. 2. The man playing Caine should also possess a more athletic physique. His unassuming and unimposing interpersonal style should continue, but if a threatening situation requires that he employ his expertise in martial arts, he ought to have a build that jibes a little more with his talent.
I think that many viewers saw in Caine a person they admired and would like to emulate. He required very little in terms of material possessions to carry on, didn't prejudge those he met (though they sometimes prejudged him), maintained a profound spiritual life yet confronted daunting situations realistically, and possessed superior survival skills in an often less than civilized world. At a time when some people in the U.S. were seeking greater spiritual fulfillment in Eastern philosophies and religions, Caine was serving as something of a role model.
If someone were to recreate the Kung Fu series, viewers would probably expect, if not demand, two changes: 1. A man of Southeast Asian ethnicity would have to play the part of Caine, not a Caucasian, even if, as was the case with David Carridine, his features suggest some Chinese ancestry. 2. The man playing Caine should also possess a more athletic physique. His unassuming and unimposing interpersonal style should continue, but if a threatening situation requires that he employ his expertise in martial arts, he ought to have a build that jibes a little more with his talent.
Dead Poets Society
(1989)
Great film, few flaws
24 April 2011
Robin Williams demonstrates his versatility in this movie. He combines his talents as a comic -- the students appear to laugh spontaneously as he improvises and impersonates -- with a capacity to express seriousness, hurt, and even humility. He not only seems to understand very well his character, an inspirational and empathetic teacher with a counterculture approach in a school where the rest of the staff values discipline and tradition, but also to have a feel for classroom education.
The young actors who play the parts of students complement Williams well. Williams does a convincing job as the unique educator who mentors as well as he teaches in part because his students come across very believably, whether taking risks with girls, trying to overcome shyness, masking fear with stubbornness, or struggling with a parent's disapproval.
Only the situation involving Neil Perry's suicide, because of the script and not the performances, strikes me as unlikely, reminding me that I am watching fiction. Yes, teenagers have occasionally resorted to killing themselves when they feel rejected, unloved, or unsupported by the people most important to them, but Neil Perry's reaction to his father's rigidity still seems too extreme, just as his father's attitude seems too inflexible.
I think I could have remained absorbed in the movie until the very end if Mr. Perry had responded to his son's successful theater debut with a tone of condescension and words such as, "Now... you have had some fun as a dramateur, and that's all well and good, but your mother and I believe that it is time for you to become serious and practical about your future, as you and I have discussed." Then Neil could have possibly reacted with resignation and some tears, or maybe could have avoided the trip home with his parents by hitching a ride and escaping into the city. He didn't have to shoot himself in the head. That act diminished rather than enhanced the believability of this story.
The young actors who play the parts of students complement Williams well. Williams does a convincing job as the unique educator who mentors as well as he teaches in part because his students come across very believably, whether taking risks with girls, trying to overcome shyness, masking fear with stubbornness, or struggling with a parent's disapproval.
Only the situation involving Neil Perry's suicide, because of the script and not the performances, strikes me as unlikely, reminding me that I am watching fiction. Yes, teenagers have occasionally resorted to killing themselves when they feel rejected, unloved, or unsupported by the people most important to them, but Neil Perry's reaction to his father's rigidity still seems too extreme, just as his father's attitude seems too inflexible.
I think I could have remained absorbed in the movie until the very end if Mr. Perry had responded to his son's successful theater debut with a tone of condescension and words such as, "Now... you have had some fun as a dramateur, and that's all well and good, but your mother and I believe that it is time for you to become serious and practical about your future, as you and I have discussed." Then Neil could have possibly reacted with resignation and some tears, or maybe could have avoided the trip home with his parents by hitching a ride and escaping into the city. He didn't have to shoot himself in the head. That act diminished rather than enhanced the believability of this story.
Natural Enemies
(1979)
A well-acted downer
26 February 2011
When Natural Enemies premiered in 1979, cable television had still not evolved, and of those few people who used computers nobody yet had heard of accessing something called the Internet, so people were still forming many of their opinions regarding the historical and social events of other countries based on movies. Little had changed in 1981, especially in places such as Argentina, where I watched Natural Enemies after happening upon an advertisement on a small sign outside a movie theater.
Did the Argentinian people who endured the story leave the theater believing that the United States needed to deal with its growing problem of murder-suicide? Did they return home after the movie feeling relieved knowing that the worst of their families were not nearly so dysfunctional? Did they ask themselves how many working people in the U.S. were making a similar daily commute through the dreary outskirts of an old, grey, in-need-of-renewal city? Maybe if the lead character could have moved his family (from someplace in the Northeast, I think) to somewhere where the sun shined, he could have begun to see his life's circumstances as less hopeless.
I would only recommend Natural Enemies to someone who prefers movies with realism, even when that means seeing the most unpleasant aspects of society, because this story can depress a viewer like no other. I would say, too, that the believable performances make this film watchable.
Did the Argentinian people who endured the story leave the theater believing that the United States needed to deal with its growing problem of murder-suicide? Did they return home after the movie feeling relieved knowing that the worst of their families were not nearly so dysfunctional? Did they ask themselves how many working people in the U.S. were making a similar daily commute through the dreary outskirts of an old, grey, in-need-of-renewal city? Maybe if the lead character could have moved his family (from someplace in the Northeast, I think) to somewhere where the sun shined, he could have begun to see his life's circumstances as less hopeless.
I would only recommend Natural Enemies to someone who prefers movies with realism, even when that means seeing the most unpleasant aspects of society, because this story can depress a viewer like no other. I would say, too, that the believable performances make this film watchable.
Breaking Away
(1979)
Outstanding
7 September 2010
The story of four high school graduates, devoted friends who reinforce each others' self-doubt while dealing with the presence in town of a major university (which serves to remind them of their lack of motivation), makes for a very touching movie. Even if a person sees himself more in the college students, pursuing professional endeavors as they enjoy the first experiences of independence from parents, s/he would have to possess a very limited capacity for empathy not to feel affected by the fears and regrets of the four boys whose working class heritage has conditioned them to feel unworthy of attending college.
Breaking Away will probably move too slowly for some, who may expect to see fast-paced and high-risk bicycling from the start. For the person who enjoys feeling his interest and tension build as situations and relationships between characters develop, however, Breaking Away will not bore him.
Besides the stigma felt by the four friends for having fathers who spent much of their working lives cutting stones at the town's rock quarry, predestining the boys to underachieve, each contends with his own personal struggle. Moocher must deal with his tiny stature and the people who mock him for it, Mike, with his regrets for having not pursued football further, in addition to his overall angry disposition, and Cyril, with the basketball scholarship he could have had as well as his undermining father.
Dave Stoller has the most complex inner conflict, I think. He attempts to live out his fantasy as an Italian cyclist in part because he does have the appropriate talent. Breaking Away reminds young people that they must sometimes give up something they do legitimately well when they make realistic and practical choices about their future as independent young adults.
Breaking Away will probably move too slowly for some, who may expect to see fast-paced and high-risk bicycling from the start. For the person who enjoys feeling his interest and tension build as situations and relationships between characters develop, however, Breaking Away will not bore him.
Besides the stigma felt by the four friends for having fathers who spent much of their working lives cutting stones at the town's rock quarry, predestining the boys to underachieve, each contends with his own personal struggle. Moocher must deal with his tiny stature and the people who mock him for it, Mike, with his regrets for having not pursued football further, in addition to his overall angry disposition, and Cyril, with the basketball scholarship he could have had as well as his undermining father.
Dave Stoller has the most complex inner conflict, I think. He attempts to live out his fantasy as an Italian cyclist in part because he does have the appropriate talent. Breaking Away reminds young people that they must sometimes give up something they do legitimately well when they make realistic and practical choices about their future as independent young adults.
Freedom Writers
(2007)
Very well acted and provocative
17 July 2010
As a story, Freedom Writers has three clear messages for the viewer: (1) Some children, by no choice of their own, must continually contend with situations that demoralize or threaten them. (2) Once in a great while in the sometimes tragic lives of troubled teens, appears an adult who, through heartfelt concern, makes them aware that they have options beyond their very limited experiences. (3) Devoted and ambitious professionals, though they may do admirable things for their clientèle, can make for disappointing spouses.
As a movie, Freedom Writers has no faults. Hillary Swank really seems to capture the personality and understand the work ethic of the teacher, Erin Gruwell. She motivates her students without pretense -- doesn't attempt to hide her middle class heritage or form an alliance by making phoney claims that she empathizes with the teenagers' struggles -- and without gimmicks. Her risk taking and challenging approach proves effectual because she truly wants her students to develop and to realize that they have choices that can lead them out of their dysfunctional community.
Though Erin Gruwell's husband frustrates her at times with his lack of ambition and unwillingness to share in his wife's enthusiasm for her work by possibly taking part in a field trip or dinner with her students, he does not come across as poorly adjusted and his complaints do not seem completely unreasonable. That Erin Gruwell one day returns home to find that he has decided to leave her also indicates that she did not want to make compromises either. Her career may have fulfilled her in ways that a marriage couldn't.
As a movie, Freedom Writers has no faults. Hillary Swank really seems to capture the personality and understand the work ethic of the teacher, Erin Gruwell. She motivates her students without pretense -- doesn't attempt to hide her middle class heritage or form an alliance by making phoney claims that she empathizes with the teenagers' struggles -- and without gimmicks. Her risk taking and challenging approach proves effectual because she truly wants her students to develop and to realize that they have choices that can lead them out of their dysfunctional community.
Though Erin Gruwell's husband frustrates her at times with his lack of ambition and unwillingness to share in his wife's enthusiasm for her work by possibly taking part in a field trip or dinner with her students, he does not come across as poorly adjusted and his complaints do not seem completely unreasonable. That Erin Gruwell one day returns home to find that he has decided to leave her also indicates that she did not want to make compromises either. Her career may have fulfilled her in ways that a marriage couldn't.
Places in the Heart
(1984)
A Deserved 2nd Best Actress Oscar
8 July 2010
Just as Sally Field's reaction to winning the Best Actress("Now I know your really like me!") seems to reveal the weaker qualities of her personality -- insecurity and the need for validation -- her most significant movie roles may have revealed her strengths. I recall an interview on public television in which Sally Field emphatically stressed to the audience of 50-60 college-aged, aspiring theatrical performers that their success in the business will depend more than anything else on their persistence. I get the feeling that Sally Field drew on her own experiences as a struggling yet determined actress to portray Norma Rae and Edna Spalding. The two women both embody Sally Field's courage and resolve in the face of repeated disappointments and frustrations.
Like the members of the Academy in 1984, I also really enjoyed "Places in The Heart." I saw impressive performances throughout, from the wife of the unfaithful husband, to the unsympathetic banker, to the abrupt blind man, to the devoted farm-hand. Only the part of Viola Kelsey, Edna Spalding's sister, and the scene with the tornado troubled me.
Were Edna Spalding and her sister so estranged that Viola Kelsey could not have helped out a little by dealing with the heat and picking a few rows of cotton, or, if she did not want to get her hands dirty, at least have assured Edna Spalding that she had a place to stay if the bank had evicted her and her two children? In regards to the twister, wouldn't it have ripped a swath in the cotton field, possibly destroying chances of her earning enough money to save the farm?
Seeing Edna Spalding, a widow raising two young children during the depression, overcome all that confronted her made me and many others feel hopeful. I did not want her not to succeed, even for the sake of a little more realism.
Like the members of the Academy in 1984, I also really enjoyed "Places in The Heart." I saw impressive performances throughout, from the wife of the unfaithful husband, to the unsympathetic banker, to the abrupt blind man, to the devoted farm-hand. Only the part of Viola Kelsey, Edna Spalding's sister, and the scene with the tornado troubled me.
Were Edna Spalding and her sister so estranged that Viola Kelsey could not have helped out a little by dealing with the heat and picking a few rows of cotton, or, if she did not want to get her hands dirty, at least have assured Edna Spalding that she had a place to stay if the bank had evicted her and her two children? In regards to the twister, wouldn't it have ripped a swath in the cotton field, possibly destroying chances of her earning enough money to save the farm?
Seeing Edna Spalding, a widow raising two young children during the depression, overcome all that confronted her made me and many others feel hopeful. I did not want her not to succeed, even for the sake of a little more realism.
The Sound of Music
(1965)
Still entertaining and a little bit moving
6 October 2009
I did not see The Sound of Music until maybe 15 years after its initial release. For some reason, my mother and father did not feel I should see the film. Did my parents think it too long and too slow for someone my age (nine years in 1965)? Did they consider the story and the film's style more suitable to girls and women than to boys and men? Did they fear that a situation or two might upset me? Maybe my parents recognized that while the movie did not include any scene truly scandalous or controversial, they did not think the subject matter would interest me.
Whatever their thinking, I recall that this movie that I was discouraged from seeing had apparently created something of a craze across the nation. I remember clearly that in the town where I grew up elementary school teachers, during the 45 minutes devoted 3 times a week to chorus, led their students in singing songs from the Sound of Music's soundtrack, just as high school music instructors included elements of The Sound of Music in the annual On-Broadway production that 17 and 18 year-olds performed for any and all members of the community to attend.
Julie Andrews, herself, had an impact on me, as she did on many other people, who seemed rather enamored of her. In addition to her cute looks, she projected a wholesomeness and innocence -- qualities embodied, not coincidentally, by both her Mary Poppins and Sister Maria characters -- which caused audiences to treat her more as a role model than as a movie star.
Because of its powerful theme song and various other catchy tunes, awe inspiring cinematography, fine acting and an inoffensive script, light humor, and plot involving a significant historical event, The Sound of Music can give the impression of having been made during an earlier era. Despite all the straight-laced characters, however, The Sound of Music may have reflected the culture of the 1960's more than viewers realize.
Sister Maria may not behave like a rebel, but she does show herself to be an individual, who recognizes her inner conflict and comes to realize that a life of devotion to God and many hours in meditation within the confines of a convent don't suit her. More notably, her mother superior, rather than reproach Sister Maria for feeling pulled by both the natural and human activity beyond the walls of the convent, encourages Sister Maria to heed her inner voice and to pursue the interests that fulfill her, even if that means forsaking a higher calling.
Whatever their thinking, I recall that this movie that I was discouraged from seeing had apparently created something of a craze across the nation. I remember clearly that in the town where I grew up elementary school teachers, during the 45 minutes devoted 3 times a week to chorus, led their students in singing songs from the Sound of Music's soundtrack, just as high school music instructors included elements of The Sound of Music in the annual On-Broadway production that 17 and 18 year-olds performed for any and all members of the community to attend.
Julie Andrews, herself, had an impact on me, as she did on many other people, who seemed rather enamored of her. In addition to her cute looks, she projected a wholesomeness and innocence -- qualities embodied, not coincidentally, by both her Mary Poppins and Sister Maria characters -- which caused audiences to treat her more as a role model than as a movie star.
Because of its powerful theme song and various other catchy tunes, awe inspiring cinematography, fine acting and an inoffensive script, light humor, and plot involving a significant historical event, The Sound of Music can give the impression of having been made during an earlier era. Despite all the straight-laced characters, however, The Sound of Music may have reflected the culture of the 1960's more than viewers realize.
Sister Maria may not behave like a rebel, but she does show herself to be an individual, who recognizes her inner conflict and comes to realize that a life of devotion to God and many hours in meditation within the confines of a convent don't suit her. More notably, her mother superior, rather than reproach Sister Maria for feeling pulled by both the natural and human activity beyond the walls of the convent, encourages Sister Maria to heed her inner voice and to pursue the interests that fulfill her, even if that means forsaking a higher calling.
American Idol
(2002– )
So popular but mediocre
22 May 2009
Singing with appropriate emotion must at times come hard for a young performer. How can a girl who has not yet completed high school infuse a ballad from her grandparents' youth with the passion of an adult? Maybe not even with undeniable skill and a spirited effort. I am definitely not implying with my opinion that American Idol organizers should avoid The British Invasion, Motown, Burt Bacharach, Petula Clark, Elvis Presley or any other artist from the 1960's or early 70's, because I prefer songs from that era to most everything I have heard since (If contestants had to compete by performing the works of some current rapper or hip-hopper, American Idol would become a parody of itself.). I do wish, though, that whenever the judges make the wrong-song-choice comment, even when valid, that they would recognize and respect more the limitations of the contestants.
Other behaviors on the part of the judges that diminish the show: 1. "She's in it to win it!" - People are competing, I realize, and they are singing popular tunes, not opera, and Randy Jackson sure comes across as broad minded and big hearted, yet that comment belongs in a different venue. If they were stuffing down hot dogs, running a series of 100 yard sprints, or even downhill skiing, I would have an easier time hearing rah-rah, unprofessional sounding commentary.
2. Favoritism - I don't consider American Idol anything approaching a sacred tradition, but I do consider a singing competition too complex for judges to loudly assert each week who has surged ahead of the others. Except on the special occasion when contestants perform as duets, they almost never sing the same song. They each must, then, deal with different demands on their range, a unique pace and rhythm, and the possible need for creativity to transcend the reputation of the original artist. So many variables exist. A singer needs to have more than 3-4 songs on his/her repertoire that s/he sings well, I agree, but if s/he has established him/herself as a legitimate talent and potential winner, then one problematic or mediocre performance shouldn't incur so much disapproval.
3. Comparisons - If participants are going to sing as (the aforementioned) duets, they are almost inviting comparisons. Still, I would like the judges to evaluate these and other performances without telling a singer how s/he faired relative to a rival, and especially not the one at her/his side. "You got behind the beat a couple of times," or "you didn't sing with same energy as last week," "you missed the pitch off and on," I can accept, but not "____________ definitely won that round," or any other assessment that tells a contestant that s/he loses in comparison to one of her/his buddies - especially dishonoring.
4. Hyperbole and Adoration - The American Idol winner and the 2nd -4th place finishers, once they do begin to make money singing to audiences of 1000's of faithful followers and screaming teens, will know the experience of having people revere them. The judges don't need to give them an introduction. The bows, glitter, awestruck expressions together with over-the-top praise, such as "That was perfect," or "I am obsessed with you," and (especially) "I want to marry you," and even the standing ovations have got to stop. They all strike me as indulgent and, ironically, inauthentic. People (Nikki Minaj) who dare assert that a contestant's performance lacked authenticity because her personality or nature did not come through should not conduct themselves so pretentiously.
American Idol needs the judging panel. Because they know the music profession, the judges have wisdom to share with and valuable advice to give to the aspiring singers. They also educate the audience and influence the voters so that, hopefully, they make choices based on merit and not on emotion. But since the great majority of those that have served on the panel couldn't compete against the young people they are critiquing -- unassuming Keith Urban included, despite all his insightful observations -- I would like the judges to play more of a supporting role and provide less of a supporting act.
Other behaviors on the part of the judges that diminish the show: 1. "She's in it to win it!" - People are competing, I realize, and they are singing popular tunes, not opera, and Randy Jackson sure comes across as broad minded and big hearted, yet that comment belongs in a different venue. If they were stuffing down hot dogs, running a series of 100 yard sprints, or even downhill skiing, I would have an easier time hearing rah-rah, unprofessional sounding commentary.
2. Favoritism - I don't consider American Idol anything approaching a sacred tradition, but I do consider a singing competition too complex for judges to loudly assert each week who has surged ahead of the others. Except on the special occasion when contestants perform as duets, they almost never sing the same song. They each must, then, deal with different demands on their range, a unique pace and rhythm, and the possible need for creativity to transcend the reputation of the original artist. So many variables exist. A singer needs to have more than 3-4 songs on his/her repertoire that s/he sings well, I agree, but if s/he has established him/herself as a legitimate talent and potential winner, then one problematic or mediocre performance shouldn't incur so much disapproval.
3. Comparisons - If participants are going to sing as (the aforementioned) duets, they are almost inviting comparisons. Still, I would like the judges to evaluate these and other performances without telling a singer how s/he faired relative to a rival, and especially not the one at her/his side. "You got behind the beat a couple of times," or "you didn't sing with same energy as last week," "you missed the pitch off and on," I can accept, but not "____________ definitely won that round," or any other assessment that tells a contestant that s/he loses in comparison to one of her/his buddies - especially dishonoring.
4. Hyperbole and Adoration - The American Idol winner and the 2nd -4th place finishers, once they do begin to make money singing to audiences of 1000's of faithful followers and screaming teens, will know the experience of having people revere them. The judges don't need to give them an introduction. The bows, glitter, awestruck expressions together with over-the-top praise, such as "That was perfect," or "I am obsessed with you," and (especially) "I want to marry you," and even the standing ovations have got to stop. They all strike me as indulgent and, ironically, inauthentic. People (Nikki Minaj) who dare assert that a contestant's performance lacked authenticity because her personality or nature did not come through should not conduct themselves so pretentiously.
American Idol needs the judging panel. Because they know the music profession, the judges have wisdom to share with and valuable advice to give to the aspiring singers. They also educate the audience and influence the voters so that, hopefully, they make choices based on merit and not on emotion. But since the great majority of those that have served on the panel couldn't compete against the young people they are critiquing -- unassuming Keith Urban included, despite all his insightful observations -- I would like the judges to play more of a supporting role and provide less of a supporting act.
I Love Lucy
(1951–1957)
Timeless
24 April 2009
Whenever I think about the first times I watched I Love Lucy, with my family during the early 1960's, I recall just as clearly my mother's reactions as I do the show itself. I can still picture her jerking and writhing on the sofa as she laughed hysterically.
I enjoyed I Love Lucy back then, too. I did not get the messages behind some of the more nuanced comments between Fred and Ethel or Lucy and Ricky, but at ages six and seven I certainly saw the humor in Lucy's mishaps, misadventures, and pranks, as well in her husband Ricky's frustration.
A viewer does not need much intellect to find something to like about I Love Lucy, though as an adult s/he can better appreciate the show's basic premise: envious wife of popular band leader sometimes takes extreme measures to gain some recognition for herself. A viewer doesn't need to possess a keen awareness either to have noticed that I Love Lucy evolved before it became so popular.
In one of the first episodes, Lucy and Ricky shout, sing, pound the floor, and beat on drums late at night to irritate their demanding neighbors in the apartment below. The two behave as if of the same ilk.
Desi Arnaz may have decided sometime during the show's first season that he and Lucy could not both have impulsive and emotionally driven personalities. The formula for the show's repeated success may have resulted from his realization that his character needed sophistication to balance Lucy's lack of it.
For a program that first appeared nearly 60 years ago and usually featured a grown woman who acted out her feelings like a 13-year old, I Love Lucy almost never comes across as corny. In fact (once I Love Lucy established itself), only one episode, when starstruck Ethel and Lucy take turns jumping and kissing John Wayne on the cheek, has served to remind me that I would probably feel like an outcast as an adult in the 1950's.
In the great majority of cases, I Love Lucy continues to entertain. People recognize the imaginative situations, clever dialog, and the impressive performances.... despite the passing of time.
I enjoyed I Love Lucy back then, too. I did not get the messages behind some of the more nuanced comments between Fred and Ethel or Lucy and Ricky, but at ages six and seven I certainly saw the humor in Lucy's mishaps, misadventures, and pranks, as well in her husband Ricky's frustration.
A viewer does not need much intellect to find something to like about I Love Lucy, though as an adult s/he can better appreciate the show's basic premise: envious wife of popular band leader sometimes takes extreme measures to gain some recognition for herself. A viewer doesn't need to possess a keen awareness either to have noticed that I Love Lucy evolved before it became so popular.
In one of the first episodes, Lucy and Ricky shout, sing, pound the floor, and beat on drums late at night to irritate their demanding neighbors in the apartment below. The two behave as if of the same ilk.
Desi Arnaz may have decided sometime during the show's first season that he and Lucy could not both have impulsive and emotionally driven personalities. The formula for the show's repeated success may have resulted from his realization that his character needed sophistication to balance Lucy's lack of it.
For a program that first appeared nearly 60 years ago and usually featured a grown woman who acted out her feelings like a 13-year old, I Love Lucy almost never comes across as corny. In fact (once I Love Lucy established itself), only one episode, when starstruck Ethel and Lucy take turns jumping and kissing John Wayne on the cheek, has served to remind me that I would probably feel like an outcast as an adult in the 1950's.
In the great majority of cases, I Love Lucy continues to entertain. People recognize the imaginative situations, clever dialog, and the impressive performances.... despite the passing of time.
All in the Family
(1971–1979)
Peerless
24 March 2009
Whenever I notice that a channel is presenting reruns of All In The Family, I make sure to watch. I usually still find the stories enjoyable -- even if once in awhile a dialog seems dated - - and I still laugh out loud during scenes I may have seen 8-10 times over the last 35+ years. To me All In The Family continues to stand out amongst situation comedies, and amongst most television shows for that matter.
All in The Family did have its faults, however. The shouting that so often took place between characters, especially between Mike and Archie, got tiresome, as did Edith's trotting to and from the kitchen. A change in a more fundamental aspect of the show, however, really began to make to make the show less appealing after the first 3-4 seasons.
All new ideas eventually become old, and I may have begun losing interest as the controversial themes that made All In The Family such a revolutionary program started to lose their impact. Looking back, though, I recall that I also began to feel differently about All In The Family because I noticed that Archie Bunker was changing.
Whether later scripts were requiring Archie Bunker to alter his style, or Carrol O'Conner could no longer call forth the same volatile temper and caustic sarcasm that marked the character he played so well, I remember seeing Archie Bunker become an irritable, whiny, elderly-looking man, who overreacted like a hypochondriac to stubbed toes and bumped heads. The same man who had entertained by mispronouncing and misusing words and names was apparently trying to do the same by mismanaging his own body.
For the most part, All In The Family included characters that were very well conceived. They did represent social types, true, but a viewer could not always predict their behavior. Though Archie Bunker, for example, tended to dominate discussions, despite his illogical reasoning, with his chauvinistic attitudes and feelings of indignation, he did on occasion have something valid to say.
Similarly, while in most episodes the subservient Edith catered to Archie's wants and demands, or made comments that exuded naivety, she did assert herself now and then, demonstrating a social kind of intelligence lacking in her husband. Son-in-law Mike could surprise the viewer, too. Although he usually adamantly advocated the counterculture ideology typical of college students of the early 70's, his arguments revealed a sexist core whenever he had to confront the issue of women's rights.
One could not consider family friend Lionel Jefferson simple or one-dimensional either. He almost never agreed with Archie and did not approve of his bigotry, but he recognized the limits of Archie's experience and intellect, so instead of allowing himself to enter into power struggles with Archie, Lionel spoofed Archie's opinions and made him look all the more foolish in the process.
Sometimes I have wondered if the popularity of simpler, light-hearted shows, such as Happy Days and Three's Company, influenced All In The Family's writers, since episodes after the first few seasons seemed to include an element of silliness or broad comedy. Whatever the direction that they consciously took the show, it succeeded because the members of its cast performed as if from a higher league.
All in The Family did have its faults, however. The shouting that so often took place between characters, especially between Mike and Archie, got tiresome, as did Edith's trotting to and from the kitchen. A change in a more fundamental aspect of the show, however, really began to make to make the show less appealing after the first 3-4 seasons.
All new ideas eventually become old, and I may have begun losing interest as the controversial themes that made All In The Family such a revolutionary program started to lose their impact. Looking back, though, I recall that I also began to feel differently about All In The Family because I noticed that Archie Bunker was changing.
Whether later scripts were requiring Archie Bunker to alter his style, or Carrol O'Conner could no longer call forth the same volatile temper and caustic sarcasm that marked the character he played so well, I remember seeing Archie Bunker become an irritable, whiny, elderly-looking man, who overreacted like a hypochondriac to stubbed toes and bumped heads. The same man who had entertained by mispronouncing and misusing words and names was apparently trying to do the same by mismanaging his own body.
For the most part, All In The Family included characters that were very well conceived. They did represent social types, true, but a viewer could not always predict their behavior. Though Archie Bunker, for example, tended to dominate discussions, despite his illogical reasoning, with his chauvinistic attitudes and feelings of indignation, he did on occasion have something valid to say.
Similarly, while in most episodes the subservient Edith catered to Archie's wants and demands, or made comments that exuded naivety, she did assert herself now and then, demonstrating a social kind of intelligence lacking in her husband. Son-in-law Mike could surprise the viewer, too. Although he usually adamantly advocated the counterculture ideology typical of college students of the early 70's, his arguments revealed a sexist core whenever he had to confront the issue of women's rights.
One could not consider family friend Lionel Jefferson simple or one-dimensional either. He almost never agreed with Archie and did not approve of his bigotry, but he recognized the limits of Archie's experience and intellect, so instead of allowing himself to enter into power struggles with Archie, Lionel spoofed Archie's opinions and made him look all the more foolish in the process.
Sometimes I have wondered if the popularity of simpler, light-hearted shows, such as Happy Days and Three's Company, influenced All In The Family's writers, since episodes after the first few seasons seemed to include an element of silliness or broad comedy. Whatever the direction that they consciously took the show, it succeeded because the members of its cast performed as if from a higher league.
Desert Bloom
(1986)
Unappreciated
23 February 2009
Desert Bloom belongs on a list of the ten most underrated movies of the last thirty years. An original setting -- no Rock and Roll pioneers, professional sports heroes, or other aspect of popular culture in this look at 1950's life in the U.S. -- excellent acting; and a believable, thought-provoking story; Desert Bloom has much to hold a viewer's interest.
I realize that Desert Bloom, a story about common people and mostly devoid of action, may not appeal to the many people who look to movies for diversion and entertainment. For the person who enjoys films that cause one to reflect and to experience more than a thrill, however, Desert Bloom will probably make him feel that he has chosen a very meaningful way to spend two hours.
While Jon Voight, as a rigid and occasionally explosive World War II veteran, gives a performance that rivals any of his other roles, and Jo Beth Williams, as his unfailingly optimistic and codependent wife, portrays her part convincingly, the work of Annabelle Gish leaves the most profound impression. The oldest daughter in a dysfunctional family (Voight and Williams as her troubled parents), Gish tells the story of her teenage years in retrospect as a forty-something adult.
Speaking with the firmness and controlled confidence of someone who has had to endure, Rose (Gisch) indicates that she has not only survived her father's alcoholism and abuse, but also that the quality of her life has progressed well beyond the one afforded by her parents' pathetic relationship. More importantly, though, Rose makes the viewer aware that at a time when the U.S. military was developing weapons powerful enough to devastate any foe, some children were feeling nearly powerless in their own homes in the face of real threats to their safety.
I realize that Desert Bloom, a story about common people and mostly devoid of action, may not appeal to the many people who look to movies for diversion and entertainment. For the person who enjoys films that cause one to reflect and to experience more than a thrill, however, Desert Bloom will probably make him feel that he has chosen a very meaningful way to spend two hours.
While Jon Voight, as a rigid and occasionally explosive World War II veteran, gives a performance that rivals any of his other roles, and Jo Beth Williams, as his unfailingly optimistic and codependent wife, portrays her part convincingly, the work of Annabelle Gish leaves the most profound impression. The oldest daughter in a dysfunctional family (Voight and Williams as her troubled parents), Gish tells the story of her teenage years in retrospect as a forty-something adult.
Speaking with the firmness and controlled confidence of someone who has had to endure, Rose (Gisch) indicates that she has not only survived her father's alcoholism and abuse, but also that the quality of her life has progressed well beyond the one afforded by her parents' pathetic relationship. More importantly, though, Rose makes the viewer aware that at a time when the U.S. military was developing weapons powerful enough to devastate any foe, some children were feeling nearly powerless in their own homes in the face of real threats to their safety.
Remember the Titans
(2000)
Predictable But Very Enjoyable
7 January 2009
The person who assigns parts to actors always has a very important job, but his choices can become crucial in the case of a movie involving a sport. Miscasting in this kind of movie can subject some performers to ridicule and doom even the most thoughtful and well written story to mediocrity.
In a story about a singer/musician, for example, the woman selected to play the part of the entertainer can learn the lyrics to various songs, sway and smile, engage an audience, move her mouth and her hands. She does not have to truly sing or play an instrument. Similarly, a man chosen to play the part of a United States president or well-known foreign leader can prepare by learning the significant events that took place during the ruler's reign, study his idiosyncrasies and mannerisms, and memorize important speeches - almost a natural task for an actor. He does not have to have ever held a government post as a prerequisite.
I don't mean to imply that an actor with only community theater experience could easily play one of the above parts in a major motion picture, or that a person awarded for his performance in one of these roles would not deserve the recognition. The person who portrays an athlete might in some ways, in fact, have a less challenging job.
But unlike the actor who plays the part of an entertainer or a politician (or who portrays a doctor, a priest, a teacher, a criminal, a soldier, a pilot, an explorer, or a lawyer, for that matter), the one who plays the part of an athlete has definite limits with respect to what he can pretend. He can't fake agility, coordination, a comfortable running style, a natural throwing motion or catching form; he must demonstrate skills beyond his acting.
Remember The Titans moved and inspired me (despite a few scenes and some dialog that sort of manipulate a viewer's feelings) partly because the young men playing members of that football team not only swaggered, jostled, bantered, and jived like high school athletes, they also played like them. This movie benefits from equally impressive performances from the adults. Denzel Washington did a commendable job as Herman Boone, the demanding, domineering, yet fair head football coach, and Will Patton did tremendous work as the demoted head coach Bill Yoast, the mentor with the softer approach and rather folksy style, who must deal with the immaturity of his bigoted friends as well as his tendency to patronize the African American members of the team.
In a story about a singer/musician, for example, the woman selected to play the part of the entertainer can learn the lyrics to various songs, sway and smile, engage an audience, move her mouth and her hands. She does not have to truly sing or play an instrument. Similarly, a man chosen to play the part of a United States president or well-known foreign leader can prepare by learning the significant events that took place during the ruler's reign, study his idiosyncrasies and mannerisms, and memorize important speeches - almost a natural task for an actor. He does not have to have ever held a government post as a prerequisite.
I don't mean to imply that an actor with only community theater experience could easily play one of the above parts in a major motion picture, or that a person awarded for his performance in one of these roles would not deserve the recognition. The person who portrays an athlete might in some ways, in fact, have a less challenging job.
But unlike the actor who plays the part of an entertainer or a politician (or who portrays a doctor, a priest, a teacher, a criminal, a soldier, a pilot, an explorer, or a lawyer, for that matter), the one who plays the part of an athlete has definite limits with respect to what he can pretend. He can't fake agility, coordination, a comfortable running style, a natural throwing motion or catching form; he must demonstrate skills beyond his acting.
Remember The Titans moved and inspired me (despite a few scenes and some dialog that sort of manipulate a viewer's feelings) partly because the young men playing members of that football team not only swaggered, jostled, bantered, and jived like high school athletes, they also played like them. This movie benefits from equally impressive performances from the adults. Denzel Washington did a commendable job as Herman Boone, the demanding, domineering, yet fair head football coach, and Will Patton did tremendous work as the demoted head coach Bill Yoast, the mentor with the softer approach and rather folksy style, who must deal with the immaturity of his bigoted friends as well as his tendency to patronize the African American members of the team.
Beverly Hills Cop
(1984)
More than a funny police film
10 December 2008
Considering how often I laughed during this movie, whether Axel Foley (Eddie Murphy) mocked members of the Beverly Hills Police Force or boyish Beverly Hills Police officer Billy Rosewood (Judge Reinhold) frustrated his much more seasoned partner, John Taggert (John Ashton), I tend to think of this film as a comedy. Anybody planning to rent it, however, may find himself feeling a little shocked on occasion if he has expected to recline on his sofa and take in an amusing story about a cocky, streetwise cop who upstages several naive ones.
Beverly Hills Cop also includes a few plainly violent scenes, each one sobering because its realism. A viewer sensitive to gunfire or fisticuffs might find these moments upsetting, notwithstanding Axel Foley's gestures or comments to make light of their intensity.
For those having an easier time assimilating the violence, though, Beverly Hills Cop not only entertains, with mostly clever and some crude dialog, it also informs. Featuring a plot that involves cocaine and coffee grounds, customs and contraband, responsible and reproachful police protocol, Beverly Hills Cop gives its audience a valuable introductory course in law enforcement and criminology.
Beverly Hills Cop has remained popular, I believe, because of the performances -- all of them -- from those of the thugs with the small parts to the leads. To me, two actors stand out, nevertheless: Ronnie Cox, the ethical Beverly Hills Police Lieutenant Andrew Bogomil, who handles his force with the controlled anger of a school principal, and Gilbert Hill, the Detroit Police Inspector Todd, not at all formal but equally intolerant of Axel Foley's nonconforming ways.
Beverly Hills Cop also includes a few plainly violent scenes, each one sobering because its realism. A viewer sensitive to gunfire or fisticuffs might find these moments upsetting, notwithstanding Axel Foley's gestures or comments to make light of their intensity.
For those having an easier time assimilating the violence, though, Beverly Hills Cop not only entertains, with mostly clever and some crude dialog, it also informs. Featuring a plot that involves cocaine and coffee grounds, customs and contraband, responsible and reproachful police protocol, Beverly Hills Cop gives its audience a valuable introductory course in law enforcement and criminology.
Beverly Hills Cop has remained popular, I believe, because of the performances -- all of them -- from those of the thugs with the small parts to the leads. To me, two actors stand out, nevertheless: Ronnie Cox, the ethical Beverly Hills Police Lieutenant Andrew Bogomil, who handles his force with the controlled anger of a school principal, and Gilbert Hill, the Detroit Police Inspector Todd, not at all formal but equally intolerant of Axel Foley's nonconforming ways.
Rain Man
(1988)
Touching and very funny
28 August 2008
Warning: Spoilers
The third or fourth time I watched Rain Main, I began to have doubts about the events that transpired in Las Vegas. When the casino management sequestered Charlie Babbit in a private room, informed him that they had videotaped him as he played Black Jack, accused him of counting cards, and ordered him to get out of the hotel and not return, they made no mention of the man with the deadpan demeanor sitting next to him at the table.
"Just keep your mouth shut, take your winnings, leave the casino, and don't come back," they could have told Charlie Babbit, "and take your strange little partner with you." Seems that someone would have questioned Charlie about the man with whom he often spoke -- the dealer must have noticed that Charlie sometimes openly consulted Raymond before placing his bet--rather than treat Charlie as if he were traveling alone.
If, as Raymond's Doctor Bruner said early in the film, an autistic person doesn't tolerate changes in his daily routine because he desperately needs order and predictability in his life to feel safe, wouldn't the constant flashing of lights, movement of people, and noise from slot machines and roulette wheels cause him to panic? The casino scene begs that question.
In any case, my favorite part of the story takes place before the cross country road trip begins, when Charlie drives to Wallbrook, first discovers he has an older brother, and learns about his uniqueness. The dialog between Wallbrook employee, Vern, and Charlie, as well as Raymond's reaction to having unexpected visitors in his room sound very natural.
The quality of the story does not really suffer,though, once Charlie and Raymond embark on the journey that takes them from Ohio to California. Dustin Hoffman does such a convincing job as an emotionally and socially limited yet intellectually gifted man, obsessed with numbers, patterns, and lists, and compelled to memorize them, that less plausible moments become believable.
"Just keep your mouth shut, take your winnings, leave the casino, and don't come back," they could have told Charlie Babbit, "and take your strange little partner with you." Seems that someone would have questioned Charlie about the man with whom he often spoke -- the dealer must have noticed that Charlie sometimes openly consulted Raymond before placing his bet--rather than treat Charlie as if he were traveling alone.
If, as Raymond's Doctor Bruner said early in the film, an autistic person doesn't tolerate changes in his daily routine because he desperately needs order and predictability in his life to feel safe, wouldn't the constant flashing of lights, movement of people, and noise from slot machines and roulette wheels cause him to panic? The casino scene begs that question.
In any case, my favorite part of the story takes place before the cross country road trip begins, when Charlie drives to Wallbrook, first discovers he has an older brother, and learns about his uniqueness. The dialog between Wallbrook employee, Vern, and Charlie, as well as Raymond's reaction to having unexpected visitors in his room sound very natural.
The quality of the story does not really suffer,though, once Charlie and Raymond embark on the journey that takes them from Ohio to California. Dustin Hoffman does such a convincing job as an emotionally and socially limited yet intellectually gifted man, obsessed with numbers, patterns, and lists, and compelled to memorize them, that less plausible moments become believable.
Stand and Deliver
(1988)
Both An Interesting Story and An Entertaining Movie
15 May 2008
Anyone who has taught in a high school classroom, as I have, knows that bringing about academic achievement in teenagers demands a lot from a teacher, even in a community where students return home each day to parents who have graduated from college and value formal education. For many teachers, I think, their work brings them occasional satisfaction, but requires much patience, time, and self-control, unless a teacher reports to work each day with the unusual motivation of a Jaime Escalante.
Escalante didn't seem to lose desire as the school year progressed, finding himself, like teachers I have known, feeling nearly depleted when 4-5 weeks remain in the 4th and final quarter. He approached his work with the same enthusiasm in May as he had September.
The more I have seen (20+ times by now) "Stand and Deliver," the more I recognize Jaime Escalante's unique ability to discipline, rally, and push his students. I have not, however, set out to emulate Jaime Escalante, though I admire him for his talents.
His success apparently came, as evidenced by the heart attack, at a cost to his health -- although he may never have made physical fitness a priority -- and to his family. I recall one short but significant scene in which Escalante's wife complained that her husband had dedicated himself so much to his Garfield High School students that he did not make time for his own son's schoolwork.
He also seemed capable of alienating coworkers who did not share his point of view, and of offending students who did not respond well to his prodding with comments which, as educators understand, can ruin a classroom teacher's reputation.
I am basing my opinions about Jaime Escalante, I realize, on a film that I assume presents the truth, and on some very believable performances. Those actors playing the parts of teachers and administrators speak to each other as if they were the frustrated staff members of a dysfunctional school, just as those playing the parts of teenagers carry themselves as if they were the unruly and misguided students who grow to take on the values of their demanding and inspiring math teacher, portrayed very authentically by Edward Olmos Jr.
Escalante didn't seem to lose desire as the school year progressed, finding himself, like teachers I have known, feeling nearly depleted when 4-5 weeks remain in the 4th and final quarter. He approached his work with the same enthusiasm in May as he had September.
The more I have seen (20+ times by now) "Stand and Deliver," the more I recognize Jaime Escalante's unique ability to discipline, rally, and push his students. I have not, however, set out to emulate Jaime Escalante, though I admire him for his talents.
His success apparently came, as evidenced by the heart attack, at a cost to his health -- although he may never have made physical fitness a priority -- and to his family. I recall one short but significant scene in which Escalante's wife complained that her husband had dedicated himself so much to his Garfield High School students that he did not make time for his own son's schoolwork.
He also seemed capable of alienating coworkers who did not share his point of view, and of offending students who did not respond well to his prodding with comments which, as educators understand, can ruin a classroom teacher's reputation.
I am basing my opinions about Jaime Escalante, I realize, on a film that I assume presents the truth, and on some very believable performances. Those actors playing the parts of teachers and administrators speak to each other as if they were the frustrated staff members of a dysfunctional school, just as those playing the parts of teenagers carry themselves as if they were the unruly and misguided students who grow to take on the values of their demanding and inspiring math teacher, portrayed very authentically by Edward Olmos Jr.
Tell Your Friends