LeslieLLKing Reviews

Absence of Malice (1981)

A Cheap Sexist Storyline

[1/10 · 14 February 2007]

Who: Megan Carter (Sally Field), investigative reporter for the Miami Standard; Michael Gallagher (Paul Newman) wholesale liquor distributor, whose father, a former bootlegger kept unsavory company. Kurt Luedtke wrote this screenplay and Sydney Pollack produced and directed it.

What: A chief investigator, I assume assigned to union leader Diaz's homicide case, sets up newspaper reporter Ms. Carter to investigate report on Gallagher as prime suspect to the Diaz Murder. When Michael's name, reputation and business are at stake, he's not to happy with Ms. Carter's questioning. The two butt heads, but both their lonely lives prove to possess just as much natural power as intellectual. Is it more important for the chief investigator to tempt and prove people's natural inclination, or is it more important for him to track down a murderer? Maybe the crime had been solved before "playing god," began. Maybe the investigator was only doing overtime. Certainly, I could have missed many pieces of information. I felt as if Paul Newman and Sally Field were surfing their roles. The expression was there, but scenes and even the dialogue between them was too fast and too shallow. Fast and shallow work, but only if you are super evil, a gangster or a superhero. In this film, they are none of these.

When: 1981 Where: Miami, Florida Megan confesses to a fellow Miami Standard reporter, her liaison with Gallagher has been accurate but not true. The whole premise to the story is highly sexist. It's not about finding a murderer, but it's about a chief investigator who wants to play an intrusive god, possibly to portray Ms. Carter as possibly "dirty," or "soiled," along with her reporting, permitting her to feel the same. The storyline is cheap and debased. It's a shame that Sally Field took this role.

When Gallagher's close friend Teresa Perrone (Melinda Dillon) commits suicide linked to emotional issues of a recent abortion, he not only blames Carter, but physically assaults her! It's crazy 1980's. Wouldn't she have filed her own police report claiming assault and battery by Gallagher? Instead, she cowardly tells him that she needs a jacket and takes his off his office coat rack. In excess subservience, she tells him that she will return it as soon as possible. It's such a demeaning and belittling scene. I could barely stand it. She only affirms his rabid abuse, by not at least verbally reprimanding him. Imagine Michael Douglass playing the role. It could have been significantly worse for her. Thankfully, Newman was in mousy not muscular form for the role. But the kind of body tennis he played with her, well we all know that it doesn't take as much muscle as it does mind.

What is the real burning question? Who killed Diaz or does Michael Gallagher really live on a boat? One out of two isn't bad. Gallagher really lives on a boat. Was I disappointed in this film? Yes. The premise is a cheap statement about women. Megan doesn't need to be set up to reveal her honest feelings, as she plainly states to Michael, "I am thirty four. I don't need a date to sleep with you." In fact, some women find themselves liberated enough to skip the date and just sleep with a man, and other women, not so much so. Did he really court her, as he stated that being his preference? No. He was lost between current sexual tension and what he knew love used to mean to him, in the past. With the aid of a bottle of red Bordeaux, the two make it through the end of their short interlude that had us figuring that they were both dreaming of love, just not with each other. "Rats." Diaz is dead, but who has yet to find a true love, not just an accurate one? Thank goodness Gallagher leaves behind his wholesale liquor business, for a journey in his boat up the Atlantic coast. The warehouse was too big, the staff often complaining, with too many boxes for him to move around. The moral of the story is: if you are an investigative newspaper reporter, don't have an intimate liaison, with someone whom you are profiling for a story, implicated to a murder. Withhold from such liaison, until the case and reporting is closed. It sounds simple enough to me. What sane woman would want to date a suspected murderer anyway? A nice start, with a man's name clear of any murder would be a much stronger beginning. When the story on Megan Carter is reported, will she lose her readership? We don't know. But considering the plot, maybe it's just another "Miami Standard."

Wimbledon (2004)

Wimbledon, or Your Local Park ? - The Latter Ain't Too Bad

[6/10 · 5 February 2007]

Weak Links/Strong Links

• Dennis Bradbury (Sam Neil) is not only a weak father, but profiling him, he is just one big pain in the *ss and it's too tedious to see him play it out on screen; he brings the whole film down; what father like that is even credible? • Lizzie Bradbury (Kirsten Dunst) Wimbledon tennis competitor blames her new tennis love Peter Colt (Paul Bettany) for her losing her recent match because he persuaded her to have sex with him the night before. Ehhh – wrong answer Lizzie. Why would you agree to that crummy character trait Kirsten? Lizzie's little tantrum is void by common law; it takes two to tango. She's at least 50% to blame. She didn't complain about his love making. Plus, it was very romantic and Shakespearean of Peter to climb up to her bedroom window, just to be close to her. • Peter never tells Lizzie that he is risking seeing her, against her father's wishes. He should let her know of his pursuits regardless. She needs to know his tenacious heroism. • Peter/Paul – what's up with your goofy tennis playing? Wimbledon or the local park? It's doesn't do justice to Wimbledon or this story-line. That two handed back hand was too much – silliness. Do actors ever review, edit, or proof-view their films? Would you really o.k. that? Anywhoserville, you starred in this film. That says something about something. Finally – Strong Links • Peter's apology scene was almost surreal sweet. It was strangely romantic. • This story and cinematography meant well, despite surrounding underutilized or underdeveloped characters • Peter may not have been a pro, but he had a nice sense of consistent focus and energy, both in tennis and courtship. Very nice, smooth, reasonable, controlled but still very natural, playful (in courtship) – more is even better. Way to go. • Peter really wanted to court Lizzie in a romantic sweetheart traditional sense that all to easily gets lost, neglected, ignored or forgotten in today's dating world. But in this film all of these good intentions were established, particularly by Peter. Kudos to you Mr. Bettany. Despite a not even fair script, your acting still captivated our attention. It is one of your consistent attributes in acting, which I have seen. Thank you. • Kirsten? I think that you do really well with Toby McGuire. I would stick with what works woman. It wasn't the most complimentary role for you, but mean old Sam/Dennis certainly didn't help your character any. Don't we all have some mean old Sam/Dennis in our lives. I know. It's the pits.

The Bourne Identity (2002)

The Bourne Identity - A Cave Man Does it Better - Got Geico Car Insurance?

[1/10 · 31 January 2007]

This contemporary CIA film was something like the French version of Pirates of the Caribbean. In the end, our protagonist, Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) really only wants some high adrenaline, the girl, and some gold and silver.

But before he hits the jackpot, we've got to rock out with this curious George. He really does monkey climb his way toward self-identity. Spiderman he is not, but he does hang from high places, reverse rock climb on the side of a building, though more like a tree frog than a monkey. That's o.k. It looked very scary. He's not really a frog. Trying to shake off amnesia from his enemy captors aboard a stormy ship off the coast of France, he makes land successfully. For a $20,000 payoff to a frustrated single girl named Marie, she quickly becomes his ally, his x for thrills and chills. Meanwhile, he retrieves a lock-box of his essentials, numerous passports, one by the name of Kane, that leads him to a luxurious Paris flat. From authorities, he learns that Kane is declared dead from a transportation accident. In the newspaper, Jason reads that he is an assassin. Marie and Jason return to the road, arriving at Eamon's quaint countryside home, along with his two small children. Who is Eamon? Marie's brother, lover, ex-husband? The superficial contrast between idyllic pastoral life and gun toting sniper chases only sours our identity for Bourne. His untimely home invasion, at Christmas, to Eamon's is simply an annoying artifice. He looks more bumbling than Bourne all through out this film. And that is being nice. I could say that he looks like one of the witch's evil monkeys from the Wizard of Oz. Is he an ant bully or just simply a pirate in search of his booty? CIA Director, Alexander Conklin (Chris Cooper) is like the Witch's chief monkey ready to pole dance at Bada Bing's. (Shrug) Maybe that is really the better gig Chris? At monkey command central, Conklin going ape over his astray monkey, Jason finally captures the bugger. Conklin's assistant, Nicky (Julia Stiles) has placed her drive thru order: one chicken patty, extra-make-up, pickle, onion, hold the lettuce and the tomato, fries and a carton of milk. And like Dr. Evil, Conklin (finger to chin) reminds Jason, that Jason is really a $30 million dollar super spy for the CIA, whose been making way too many mistakes. Bourne can't stand pressures from chief monkey Conklin, goes ape and breaks away, yet again a free monkey 'at last.' Still Bourne is chased, by what alliance, we're just not sure anymore. But we do know that Bourne is running for his life, not his death. Where in the wheel does he land this time? Another quaint scene, in a tropical café situated on a beautiful scenic blue-skied European coast, where Marie now conveniently resides. Uhh Ohh! Are you thinking what I am thinking? It's the Bourne pastoral tip-off! Is he going to tell Marie that she's run from danger, flee the café, jump off the cliff into the ocean, or instruct her to immediately head to the basement, if there is one? He's in her arms, but for how long? Who is Jason Bourne? A reverse rock climbing evil monkey? A thorn in some lion's side? Or is he a teddy bear dressed in a Nic Cage snakeskin bomber jacket, or a leprechaun smoking a cute little brown pipe? The more interesting question might be whose world is more entertaining – Wayne's World or Bourne's World? The film is directed by Doug Liman, but be forewarned – this film is closely aligned to how Jerry Bruckheimer does gay Paris.

Blood Diamond (2006)

Blood Diamond - media tip-off -Under a goat's skin it is bloody diamonds (plural)

[1/10 · 12 December 2006]

Blood Diamond – One Star Time: 1999 Place: Sierra Leone, West Africa Politics: grave civil war and racketeering, including the diamond harvest for the purchase of machine guns to support the civil war. Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, as Danny Archer, Djimon Hounsou as Solomon Vandy and Jennifer Connelly, as Maddy Bowen Premise: far out, far fetched as in tunnel vision, not strong enough to vigorously and seriously capture any sane person's attention. Solomon, while sifting for diamonds, discovers a rare pink one, and anxiously wraps it in a torn piece of rag, burying it in the earth. Of course, he plans to reclaim it. What makes it so valuable in his eyes? In England, an awaiting jeweler will buy it for a great sum. He and his family will be free, financially and socially. The most thought provoking question arises. What do we place value on and why? For Solomon and Danny Archer, the West African mercenary, riches and dreams bypass the ordinary for extraordinary by means of this pink diamond. Pursuing its capture and trade for money, each believe that there is everything to gain and possibly everything to loose, including their very own lives.

In Robinson Crusoe fashion, this premise plays out. Archer, with determined action pursues the buy out of the mentally scarring and physically taxing practices of diamond racketeering. Solomon, in grave desperation to flee the mass sick persecution, causing great harm to him and his family equates this diamond, just as brilliantly as Archer, a life changing course of passage, to first and foremost, safer land. He and his family are not fighters, maybe naive dreamers, but certainly not people of malice. Tragically, his wife is corralled with others, as prisoner. His young boy, who expressed dreams of being a doctor, is under the spell of the lead guerrilla, a ruthless man, training the boy to kill with a machine gun.

Fairly early in the film, Jennifer Connelly's character is approached by Archer. What single man isn't looking to strike up a conversation with a pretty and striking lady, in a place where only relentless pain and toil persist. She quickly says her name. Mage, Meg, Marge, Maddy? She's an American photo journalist who is set to reveal to Europe, America, if not all of the world, the cruel ways in which diamond traders and buyers work. It's a disgrace, but so is her and her character, residing in such a country portraying this war. To the very end of her West African assignment, she persists to interview West African soldiers, like a high school student collecting trivia and data for the school's weekly paper. All I can think is that Harper's Bazaar is calling you. You are completely in the wrong gig. Don't worry Jennifer. We've all found ourselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. But you volunteered and I wondered why, because you looked so absolutely stupid through out the whole film, and painfully stupid at that. How could this premise give credence to your acting?

My advice – give up on playing yourself as the liberating feminist, as it not only makes feminists look stupid, but translates to simply female idiocy. In your character's end, it comes across a little too Kathy Bates, from "Misery" – 'Mr. Man.' But again, who am I to say? You were only acting – right? Harpers Bazaar – think about it? It just might tell a closer truth, or at the very least, a better fiction!

Question for Leonardo? How would Danny ever literally store a diamond under his tooth and why? That was silly. Also, Leonardo, your goose chase was almost as ridiculous as Jennifer's, with the exception that you are a man, playing in a man's world, an oft times foolish one at that. If you wanted to show such physical prowess to your public or yourself, why didn't you talk to me first? Certainly, if you didn't like what I have already written, I could have designed something more tantalizing and less taxing. Even though your character was Crusoe precarious, you tempted me by all of your earthly wiles and sacrifices. Means by which you through this character dreamily wanted to save your soul, was infinite, not finite. That was impressive, even though the story was not. There was no compromise for you, tragic hero!

If Jennifer can have a Harper's Bazaar spread, why can't you have something that reflects Nemo found, something altruistic, like a bow flex, a lovely, cling to lady, and a resort of your choice for three months? Djimon, do you have an education? It's always continuing anyway. What about a scholarship to an American University? You cleaned up well at the end. It's certainly, not automatic riches, but it's knowledge and understanding, less ignorance and laziness. A son of yours really could become a doctor after all, or a jazz musician. Not bad. As the Chinese say, Happy Christmas!

Chicago (2002)

Chicago - edgy and smug

[1/10 · 25 October 2006]

· The film – Chicago · Time – jazz age, roaring 1920's · Place – of course, Chicago · Scandal – Roxie Hart (Renee Zellweger), married to Amos (John C. Reilly) childless, noted singer and dancer, in anger shoots her lover, Fred Casely (Dominic West) repeatedly in the chest, after their love making and his physically abusing her, very roughly pushing her to the hard wood floors of her bedroom. Richard Gere, as Billy Flynn, plays Hart's defense lawyer, often times his undeniably smoothing talking manners weigh more than his periodic snide remarks, which seem to wash out. One just shrugs his shoulders. He's a defense lawyer not a charm school instructor. His goal is not to be the leader of reform for women, culture, or society, rather more simply to make the most of circumstances as they play out around him. Mama Morten (Queen Latifah) isn't supposed to charm us with her song and dance. On stage she presents herself as the dominating tool that men need her in order to be loved by "mama." Don't all men want to be made love to by a mama? Actually, according to Comedy Central, not necessarily. There are varying viewpoints on this issue. In this case, 'bigger is better' is the rule, not the exception. How shameful or just childishly devilish of her? Off stage, in contrast, she is dressed in potato sack grey, as guard to the female prisoners, rather empathetic to their passions gone awry. · Film's Outcome - watch and see this surreal blend of life and stage style song and dance production of the main character, one woman, Roxie Hart's predicament, whose infamy is quite clearly considered before, during, and after. · Outcome as I see it – Hart's anger - yes. Latent self-defense - yes. Justified – no. Sentence – yes, prison 1 year, that includes anger management, self-defense, and marriage relation classes just to name a few. What does the movie really do without giving away the ending – celebrates female use of machine guns against lovers who dun' them wrong. Comic, absurd or just a crude display of crude women? Flynn thought it amusing. I didn't. Did I like the film? Not really. Too much of an edgy smug portrayal creating an uncomfortable, if not obnoxiously superficial barrier between actors and movie audience.

The Science of Sleep (2006)

The Science of Sleep - I was interested by this film, as discovery and evolution.

[6/10 · 11 October 2006]

I wouldn't go so far as to say such as one newspaper critic, "Bernal is riveting, glorious and unparalleled. Everyone else is boring. And he's different." But I would say that this film is one eclectic creation, or odd concoction of a recipe. The main characters, Stephane, whose native tongue is Spanish (Gael Garcia Bernal) and Stephanie, who is native to France (Charlotte Gainsbourg), are two young adults whose realities turn into dreams, reflections of their imaginative interpretive comprehension and feelings, in response to society, culture, and yes, even weather. Water from the faucet comes out as clear cellophane. A mechanical toy horse rides life like, and at times, life size, a place of work integrates as a place of play, and a place of home, specifically Stephane's turns into his own TV set and show, complete with brown card board cameras, white shag carpet, and brown egg cartooned walls. In juxtaposition, Stephane's boss, at odds with the TV, together literally carry a TV onto a bridge, tossing it into the river. Stephane's real job, as a calendar designer becomes a little surreal, as he begins to develop an unconscious, possibly suppressed love interest with Stephanie. His own calendar drawings characterize extreme societal events, for example, a plane exploding in mid-air. Nevertheless, they represent parallels as to what's already in the making at this office, a semi-nude ski play boy bunny type of calendar. By tradition, we should be used to near nude calendars…fireman, of course, playboy and playgirl, those zany British ladies, from another film, and other non-profit organizations wanting to raise some money for a good cause.

Stephane's co-workers grapple with their own suppressed unrealized parts in their life. Stephane's boss, claims and appears to be sexually free, but nevertheless we can see not completely satisfied. In the photography room, he says rather with seeming dysfunction to Stephane, "We are looking for the schizophrenic," as if he is looking for a disease to feed his own shortcomings or failings, whether they be real or only his skewed perceptions of himself. The two other associates are antagonists and are quite characteristic say of people on Steve Correll's, "The Office." As Stephane and Stephanie spend time together, they realize when apart from one another, they are more than just friends. Ironically, we are not confused about the fact they have developed this human, more instinctual, and not so often typified animal love for one another. For all of their and our confusion about surreal and real perceptions, it's still simply romantic story. In the end, it looks as if Stephane's clear choice to cancel his Mexico trip to be with Stephanie and their intent and setting sail, with their reassembled grey horse, for a new land, possibly England, possibly America, exemplifies, that some choices for bonding and unity, are just as much a state of mind, as they are action. And that is very romantic, if not simply heroic. We don't know if they really do depart France, literally, but for love's sake, their mutual consent signifies that their hearts are one and the same place. The film's conclusion, whether symbolic or real, represents the journey away from what had become, at times mutual anguish and frustration with much of the aforementioned.

This movie, in three languages, Spanish, French and English is definitely not a mainstream film, but nevertheless one that shares these woven experiences of this young pair, who evidently found that whether life was lived in fact or fiction, they sincerely cared about one another, exampled by sharing, with one another, their time and creative thoughts. As a result, confessing their truest emotions, we can't help but to feel that they are that much better off, as we come to find this ending is their very own beginning.

Monster's Ball (2001)

Worth a 1 star, for an awful look at the state of human existence.

[1/10 · 21 September 2006]

Certainly Monster's Ball, more appropriately entitled Monsters' Ball, is not worthy of a Golden Globe Award. I believe that it was best picture of the year. Why? The story-line, mistakenly perceived by the populous as vulnerably dramatic, is really only intensely pitiful at best, and portrayed as such by the characters; they are not worthy of our sincerest sensibilities. Additionally, the script is missing vital pieces including: setting – city, state and year. If it was shown, I missed it. Thus it could have been repeated for emphasis. Leticia's (Halle Berry) husband, Lawrence Musgrove (Sean, P.Diddy Combs) what was his crime for the death penalty, the electric chair? Leticia's son, Tyrell Musgrove (Coronji Calhoun), why isn't he in school? Doesn't he have homework? Leticia reprimands her chocolate feasting son – too little too late. The scene is too scripted and not natural, only another interference reminding us that we are watching a poorly written movie. Gruesome to admit, but seeing the hit and run accident upon the son would have been more credible. After all, we saw Corrections Officer, Hank Grotowski's (Billy Bob Thornton) son, Sonny (Heath Ledger) shoot himself through the heart, after confessing that he did everything to please his dad for the love of the man. Finally, was an audience at Lawrence's execution really necessary? It is such a cold and crude film, from sexual, racial, to familiar content, that it is really hard to transcend any other more worldly meaning, other than education and different jobs would probably serve them all better. Hank's father (Peter Boyle) tells Leticia that every white man isn't really a man until he has done a black woman. Frank, himself has his father's black man slave mentality, shooting a gun in the air, when blacks are roaming outside of his property, but stealthily slips into black woman lover role, never admitting to her his historical thoughts and present confusions on the matter. Hank resigns from his nausea induced correction's officer job, opening up a gasoline station and convenience mart in Leticia's name. Nevertheless, there is nothing likable, or one dare say noble about his character, particularly his perceived attempts of being considerate to a woman's needs from every mechanical detail, as to whether the music on the radio is alright for her listening pleasure and whether or not she is pleased with the oral sex he has just given her. When she replies that she is sexually content, he expresses a sudden craving for chocolate ice-cream, only proving that the moment proceeds little after thought other than satisfying his own untimely desires. It's not a moment too soon to up and drive to his gasoline store. Leaving lingering Leticia in bed, he hops in his car to his gas station. Pulling from the glass sliding door, among the industrial store lighting, a pint of chocolate ice-cream, he returns to now perturbed Leticia. Unconsciously telling her that she looks beautiful to appease her unease, chocolate ice-cream is now only a white plastic spoonful away, to feed her senses, maybe like her son fed his own. On the back steps to his home they sit, where to the right, we see the grim sight of three grave stones: her dead husband and son, and his son. There is no explanation as to why Leticia's husband and sons bodies are buried on his property. We are surprised but don't really act it, as from this story, we've come to expect anything.

It cannot be reiterated enough how little this story reaches our sincerest sensibilities, for various reasons, including an underdeveloped script with key missing story telling information. Some may say that this movie doesn't come close to reflecting pity, only disgust, whose characters never cultivate a higher sense of redemption. In light of the mood and tone, one might say that they all should have been shown over indulging in chocolate bars, only to be hit by oncoming cars, during a torrential rainy night.

This Is My Father (1998)

Kiernan O'Day feels more like O'Night - integral spoiler mat.

[5/10 · 26 July 2006]

Overall, I was very disappointed by what could have been a much more interesting and compelling story. James Caan and Aidan Quinn, such terrific actors, are so watered down by lines that just drag by, in the ordinary and unmoving. Many of the scenes, perceived as fragmented, fail at supporting cohesion for the movie's larger direction and development. Kiernan Johnson (James Caan) is a Chicago, history high school teacher, who returns to Ireland, to learn about the history of his father, dating back to 1939. Meanwhile, his mother, Fiona, (Francoise Graton) is hanging onto to her life, subsequent to suffering a stroke. Kiernan's sister, cares for Fiona. Young Jack (Jacob Tierney), Kiernan's nephew joins him in this historical journey, to the home roots of Ireland. Kiernan, via telephone reads his father's loving words, that he wrote to, Fiona, age seventeen, the time in which her mother, wrongly accuses Kiernan O'Day (Aidan Quinn) of raping her daughter, and hence preventing their marriage. But the two mutually consummate their relationship before marriage. Kiernan is a dedicated man of the land and agriculture, and Fiona (Moya Farrelly) is grounded and passionate in her love for Kiernan. The pressure for Kiernan to run away with Fiona and clear his conscious of the fat and guilt laden Catholic Irish tradition is too much for him to bear. He hangs himself at the gift tree, where the two would leave presents for one another.

There is also an interesting scene with John Cusak as Eddie Sharp, an American pilot drawn to the land of roots. The play on contrasts and similarities to young Kiernan and Fiona are then more evident. Difficult depictions of 1939 Ireland are cumbersome and the actors do so well, under much less than favorable conditions, religious, societal, and cultural. Agricultural work is physically demanding and even the strongly built Kiernan O'Day is unable to survive the psychological terrain, reinforced by priest Mooney (Stephen Rea), who stops after excavating fault, leaving a mess, with no intent to fill in the now empty spaces with love, life, and forgiveness, also represented by Jesus, but ignored by the single minded priest. Kiernan is a subject of Mooney's demise and the outcome is a tragic death.

Mooney is probably the most convincing actor, one we despise, for lack of any humanity in relating to his congregation. He is so disconnected from them, and the absurdity of it all, really diminishes our preconceived notions of understanding Kiernan. For we think that Kiernan is much too smart and intelligent, than to be bull-dozed over by a priest, whose only interest is objectifying people into the perfection of his perceived Christianity.

The film is a stark depiction of Ireland 1939, one that we can all learn from, by such grueling and inhuman preaching and societal shaping of the period. Unfortunately, the script falls short of truly capturing one's heart, mind, and soul in the way that it really should, despite such tedious subject matter. The story would have probably been better served if Kiernan Johnson's sister joined her brother and son. It looks like she could have used the vacation too.

Benedict Arnold: A Question of Honor (2003 TV Movie)

Benedict Arnold - A Question of Conviction

[6/10 · 26 July 2006]

Benedict Arnold, A Question of Honor, step by step, maybe skipping some, portrays Benedict Arnold's (Aidan Quinn) rise in the patriot forces, under George Washington (Kelsey Grammar), during the Revolutionary War of 1776. Without Arnold receiving due recognition for winning the Battle at Saratoga, it remains the pinnacle battle, that provides for the Continental Army's freedom, in America. Surprisingly, the movie was filmed in Ireland, but looked very early American. Peggy's ( Flora Montgomery) relationship to John Andre (John Light), a commanding leader to the British forces, is weak to say the least, portraying her as an inexplicably unfaithful woman, one whom you might say is a traitor herself, ironically, to the poetic poignancy of an impassioned British soldier.

Her transition to falling for Benedict occurs quite customarily for the time period, at a dance, in Philadelphia. Exchanging British witticisms, it is clear that Quinn can deliver a more convincing dialogue, pleasing sight and sound. In this scene, Peggy delivers, but Quinn pales in comparison, maybe lack of true interest or confidence, for the flair such particular delivery authentically requires. It is as if he begins walking up a flight of stairs, tiredly without purpose, and before reaching the top to the next level, begins to slowly walk back down, unable to realize his own ability. He never reaches his destination, that of speaking his own lines more characteristically of a truly charmed nature, born of British descent. Such waning attempt diminishes from the more engaging reality we anticipate, if not expect in this scene.

Peggy's transition from British love, John Andre, to American lad, Benedict Arnold falls as easily, as turning a book page. What falls short is her due explanation to John Andre, now left only to piece together his own broken heart. Not only does the portrayed, dedicated courtly man of manners loose his love to Benedict, but looses his job and his life, hung in a Patriot spectacle. Arnold has his own problems, and honestly, love determined Peggy only becomes whimpering Peggy. Rather than encouraging Arnold to negotiate his wishes with Washington, like most Patriot wives would do, she persuades his heart to defend the Loyalists, obviously her heart's home, but out of truth or convenience. Her own switch of patriotism is as nimble and sudden as her heart's desire for love fulfilled. Rather than any artifice, it merely reflects weak convictions, that which we could all do without. At Peggy's self-seeking, comfy, cozy heart, in the midst of war, Benedict appears the buffoon, for not maintaining the new American decorum. Granted Washington is not perfect and communications between people regarding events falter at times, but that should have only encouraged Benedict to stay true to the new land, defending and developing the honor of his new country.

When Peggy and Benedict return to England, she weakly awaits in the carriage, while her husband and other man, gun duel, as the custom for the husband to defend his name's honor, when his wife has been unfaithful. We see no reason or action of events that might culminate in some more realistic credible affair. We just think, "Oh Peggy must have done it again, by gosh." And there she sits, like a coward in a carriage, while her husband might end up loosing his life, just to defend his pride, at her expense.

But as one can imagine a historian saying, "history is history." One might as well say, "No use crying over spilled milk." Peggy's nature is annoying and could be in part, accountable for changing the events of history. Nevertheless, this film over all, at its core, attempts to be grounded. It is played out engagingly with heart and soul, familiar to us in Quinn, and surprisingly by Grammar, in such fitting adaptation of George Washington, no small shoes to fill. Due to such important historicism, this film is an interesting and educational piece to watch, and learn.

Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005)

Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end - Semisonic.

[9/10 · 27 June 2006]

Me and You and Everyone We Know This film offers a unique vulnerable sentiment and emotion from its characters, who like many of us regular folk, yearn for that special someone in our lives, with whom we can identify regularly on the most intimate and personal of levels. And sometime, we might find ourselves, like the characters in this film, living and communicating in the most mundane and simple environment, one that does not include prestigious jobs, rich clothes and rewards of an elite education. It's life of financial, social, personal, and cultural struggle in a lower, middle class urban community. It's about lives trying to maneuver around, what some might think, seeming impossible relational road blocks. But the protagonist, Christine Jesperson (Miranda July), a struggling writer/director symbolizes mobility of mind, body, and emotion, as an "elder cab," taxi driver. It's not her first job choice, but she makes due. One day, out of frustration, she writes "fuck," in black ink on her front windshield. She's not void to her own life's struggles. A simple but strong word reminds her that life is not really all serene blue sky, but marred with what is difficult, frustrating, and stifling. The other protagonist is Richard Swersey (John Hawkes), a father of two boys, leaving his inter-racial marriage, for reasons not explained to us. Like the lyrics to "Iris," by Johnny Resnick and the Goo Goo Dolls, "when everything feels like the movies….yeah you bleed just to know you're alive," Richard pours lighter fluid on his hand and sets it on fire, just to feel something; and still, he doesn't really. He's trapped in his life's dream without the sensation of feeling, not even fire to his hand. It's sad and sets a clear statement to the entire mood of the film.

Nevertheless, Christine is captivated by this blue-eyed melancholic, maybe sensing that they are more alike than first thought. Do we find a blossoming romance? Not in this story, and that is what draws and repels our attention at the same time. We desire them to find feeling and communication with one another, but it all happens within the script's mood and context, not our own, and because of that, we are drawn into the mystery of any hint of their revelations. It's like that Sprite commercial, where the man's eye, turns into a miniature tongue sipping on droplets of Sprite. The theme of desire is prevalent in the other characters as well, but not without the film's steadily simplistic and mundane mood, even in the modern life, where these people just might feel as if they are being left behind. Like Richard burning his hand, for better or for worse, these characters go right for the feeling, leaving constructs of communication to their own devices. Richard's littlest son, Robby (Brandon Ratcliff) talks about "back and forth poop," on an internet chat room, with of all people, the agent, of whom Christine is submitting her work. The agent is likely to be lonelier than Christine. A little girl in the neighborhood, Sylvie (Carlie Westerman) collects department store house ware items for her hope chest, a dowry that she will share someday, she says, with her husband and children. Without external sources and other people with whom to verbally identify, she does so symbolically, by collecting material possessions, that represent her future aspirations. But, what about creating present aspirations that she can feel and experience? Like the others in her community, she is one step away from communicating, embodying, and living her present truth, because the heart and soul of communication has been in some way suppressed, side tracked, derailed, shifted, or diverted from the foundation of a more enriched communicative connection of the present time.

What matters to these people is finding the feeling. Two good friends, portrayed twin teen sisters, Rebecca (Najarra Townsend) and Heather (Natasha Slayton) are insecure and competitive about who is the better sexual performer. Neither expresses the customary preoccupation about dating or having that special boyfriend. They just want to know that "I am better than she." Each of them curiously flirt with the matured male neighbor, Michael (Hector Elias) who just might be a pedophile, and then compete in an oral sex contest, with Richard's eldest son, Peter (Miles Thompson). It's obvious that their actions represent that desire to feel, but more importantly, in all reality, to be felt by another human being, and above all, to be understood.

As we well sense, the total embodiment of what these characters desire, is not only to be better understood, but to have better lives and relationships, within the community they live. And how is that achieved? The answer is through communication, that which they struggle to develop harmoniously, in the context of a society that puts their will of wants to tests and challenges, where communication is sacrificed, and quite possibly a larger truth.

Richard and Christine are slow and hesitant in their conversations with one another. We want to know: Why is he leaving his wife? Why doesn't he communicate and engage with his boys better? Why can't he explain his "coldness," to Christine? But still, we hope that maybe he will be more than her object of desire, because within each of them, lies the truth willing to be told, regardless of community and circumstance. In this end, the truth of all of these relationships is really simply about the beginning, one person being able to honestly, cohesively, and engagingly communicate, feel, and share with that of another. And that is the initial contribution to a better formulated and functioning community. The wounds have been exposed. Now it is time to heal and deal, with the real truth of desire – matters of the heart, mind, and body, not just of plight and circumstance. A positive sign – Richard's burned hand has healed. Where there is a will, there is a way.

The Baxter (2005)

Dilemmas in being a Baxter, dilemmas in love.

[8/10 · 14 June 2006]

The Baxter is really a humorously written and acted film. It quite cannily portrays the passivity and reactionary mindset through the main character Elliot Sherman, a proud CPA. Is being a Baxter such a bad trait after all? His contrasting counterpart would be Bradley Lake, (Justin Theroux) a world traveler, who avidly gets in touch with his feminine and masculine nature, when it comes to developing a love relationship. He weeps tears, loves a great hamburger and beer, and dancing too. These two men's, two women's, and their friends exaggerated characters, are authentic humor, reminding us of the power of film, in comparison to the novel. It is a fabulous example of cinematic purpose. Is Bradley in love with ex- Caroline (Elizabeth Banks), Elliot's fiancée, or is he in love with only giving and receiving intimate love? Granted, it's an important facet to the relationship, but it's not enough in and of itself, to maintain a marriage. It is too bad that Cecil Mills, (Michelle Williams) Elliot's temp is always his second choice. In the last scene, she is wearing red, symbolic to second place. Does this film end with her as only a "Baxterette"? Watch the film and decide for yourself. Still, it's a guarantee that you'll find some good laughs from these silly and quirky personalities, who remind us that sometimes we can never be absolutely confident about the love bonds that we make. To error is human – and at least we and they can do a good job about making some humor of it, because in the end, these characters are likely serious about the sentiment, wanting to be happy in love.

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

A most intriguing fiction speculating popular belief! Bold and Excellent Investigation!

[8/10 · 23 May 2006]

Most movie viewers probably read the book before seeing this movie. Hence, suspense and mystery are naturally lessoned. The book reads more thrilling than watching the film. In the film, the controversy of good vs. evil is dull, flat, and formulaic. The test: would it appear less so, had one not read the book? Answer: Not really, just more confusing, as the treasure hunt for the Holy Grail, resting place to Mary Magdalene is too rapidly paced. Whether you read the book or not, the script is too mechanical and superficial, and the character's personalities are too simple, boring, and inanimate, of course with the exception of Silas (Paul Bettany). Nevertheless, even his character is somewhat superficial. We know his psyche acts out with self-inflicting pain. How does he arrive at such state? We want to know. In the book, it says that he shot and killed his father, a drunk. If we saw a Silas flashback to his tormented childhood, we might be more fully engaged in comprehending his self-infliction. We might even internalize his pain more. All of the characters are designed too distant from our sensibilities. As a result, our attention wanes more than it should. This movie is just as much work for us, as it is for the actors, therefore, I would give it seven stars, but due to such interesting historical inquiry, I give the film eight stars. It deserved ten plus. As for author Dan Brown's happiness, in no way is it to be associated with the stars that I assign the film. As an author, he knows what I am talking about. You might say, that it is the "writer's code." Where was the entertainment value that could have strengthened our interest not detracted from it? It was missing. This film is not a documentary but plays itself so, on the book's behalf. It had entertainment potential by bringing greater human expression, interaction, and animation to the screen, but its greatest mistake, ironically is too closely following the black and white of the book. These characters could be more lively, interesting, and emotionally layered, without sacrificing the fiction's storyline. As a reinforcement, poetic license could be more generously utilized. By evidence, it is under utilized, downgrading our mental engagement and enthusiasm, for such a potentially interesting, intellectual, and mystical ancient story of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and the Holy Grail. Such intriguing inquiry is only threatening to selfish, greedy, and unadaptable religious "experts." If the autobiography of Jesus was available, it would probably be the world's number one seller of all time.

Again, Paul Bettany plays his role under the skin of the character. Everything about him is creepy, from scars to buns of steel. For his next role, instead of "Shallow Hal," he should play a fat boy, in "Shallow Sally." Between Paul and his infamous, Academy Award winner wife, Jennifer, have they sacrificed mainstream intelligence for redundant extremist role play, possibly settling for assignment, rather than soul searching for one? Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Alfred Molina, Ion McKellen and a host of others are o.k, but not challenged enough in the film's dry and flat adaptation. As for location cinematography, it is excellent, but lacks dimensional light and varied wardrobe by actors. It is a little too sleepy-eyed X-files, another reminder that I can't retire to the empty heaven of sweats. The film has enough shortcomings, but undeniably does not fall short of clearly laying out the book's story, clue by clue, scene by scene.

Mission: Impossible III (2006)

Mad TV are you warming up?

[1/10 · 9 May 2006]

This film is a tough nut to crack. Why? It is based upon good vs. evil. What is the evil founded? We know terrorism is evil. And, we know it is founded upon hatred for America, "anti-American sentiment." The picture of terrorism is clear and we know exactly why violent crimes occur. But, in MI III, the force behind the evil is not clear, and that diminishes our identification of good vs. evil. Evil takes the form of Davian, none other than a demented man set on grotesque women maiming, as in the case of agent Lindsey Ferris, (Kerry Russell) one of Ethan's newly accomplished students, and Julia, (Michelle Monaghan) Ethan's new bride. Davian's anti-woman charms seem trite, and so does terrorism for that matter, but the sad fact is, neither is extinct from our culture, only a part of it.

Why does Tom have to play such a battered hero? It seems like I just recovered from War of The Worlds. But everyone has different breadth, so to speak, and he uses his to best portray the character he is identifying.

Ethan's first mission is clear, save agent Lindsey, captive of Davian. Unfortunately, Ethan can't intercept, a deadly body implant chip. His second mission proceeds logically, capture Davian. When Davian takes Ethan's new bride hostage, Ethan follows Davian's instruction, for the safe return of beloved, Julia. Suddenly, John Musgrave, (Billy Crudop) Ethan's consultant, admits his own opportunities for steeling the rabbit's foot. Hunt's ultimate mission prevails, save a second woman's life. The first one died. Ving Rhames, as Luther Strickell, delivers a fine performance, under the pressures of his role too. Laurence Fishburne, as Hunt's boss, John Brassel is likewise is good. But for the lack of identity in this rabbit's foot, his role weakens in credibility. It's like choosing to engage in fighting a war, not knowing if the country really has weapons of mass destruction, that will be used to harm others. Almost every country has weapons of mass destruction, but are they threatening to use them to kill millions of people or any people for that matter?

Once Ethan has possession of the bargaining chip, he realizes that even that does not matter. The last mission is clearly to save his wife, whatever the cost, even his own life. It's the one mission that he doesn't fail, the one he wasn't meant to fail. Who restores his lost breadth? His wife of course, pounding on his chest, for any last hope of a heart beat. Undoubtedly, he's got to be ready for that honeymoon. He proved to be an active agent and husband, but at what price?

This script is incredibly weak on depicting reasons to evil intent, which truly detracts from Phillip Seymour Hoffman's character, to one of mere crazed bully, in need of great help, at being healthily and happily integrated, with the female species. In moments, Ethan's resentment towards Davian is equally vicious and crazed. Hoffman is such an excellent actor, but as is the case, his evilness is portrayed at a lesser value, debasing it to incomprehension, unfortunately. A simple point to remember is that, just as much as I want to know why someone is good, I also want to know why someone is evil – the root, lack of love.

There are some great bells and whistles, that inspire the camera, raising our eyebrows in interest – an exotic Asian woman, in a sexy red evening gown, a bright orange Ferrari, that is set for wonderful detonation of self-disposal, and lest one not forget, the modern and vintage downtown landscapes of China. But frankly, for all the physical work Tom had to do, I would have polished him up, in something other than a priest's habit, at the Vatican. In the second half, I might, as well, have been watching War of the Worlds. It was all a little too "Go Army," for me. Yet, the close-up shot of him in the black and white suit, among the green landscape, following Lindsey's funeral was sweet. I had a piano, that photo could sit on top of it. Personally, a little more James Bond portrayal would have been sweeter. So, it's not Hallie Berry coming out of the ocean in a bikini, it's Tom Cruise, in some nice trunks, beaching it with his new wife, sipping on tropical drinks, with little umbrellas in them. Maybe another scene with Tom zipping through tight streets on a moped, rather than an x powered Harley. In this film, he is always in need of a truck, not a motorcycle. If I was him, I'd say put the honeymoon scene in first, and then I'll do the picture. Some men ought to have smarter women dealing for them. That's what I would have pushed. So, I am talking a little less explosive and a little more naturally refined. James Bond meets Ethan Hunt, viola! You have probably near the perfect hero! Every hero has to have some special vulnerability, related to female sensibilities and charms. Bond, as we know, probably has too many, maybe Hunt, too few?

Movies are a chance to shape physical action to the script's story. For the painstaking, if not punishing stunts that Tom performed, both action and story were typical and unmemorable – missing charm, creativity, and most of all opportunity, to captivate an audience in the way that they could be, by more deeply portraying good vs. evil. Maybe the rabbit's foot was really nothing, but a story once told, nevertheless a reason for Davian to say that he must have it. And in the end, the elusive rabbit's foot, could have been quite possibly a story, a folk tale. One woman died a brutal death, and one walked away free, with strength and belief enough, to save the hero's life. And from that lesson and that result, good prevailed, and the love of mankind, and the sanctity of peace and care.

Walk the Line (2005)

completely wonderful portrayal of sensitive subject matter

[10/10 · 14 March 2006]

Even if you're not a fan of family saga, Walk The Line is worth seeing, just for the highlights of watching and listening to Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon perform musically. But this movie is even much more, at the heart, which will surprise the movie goer. Joaquin, as Johnny Cash plays the underdog country crooner with heart wrenching grit, style, and surprising sensitivity, sensibility, and sentimentality. His addiction to prescription pills never supports the happiness he truly desires and yearns for with June Carter (Reese Witherspoon), who will later become his second wife, after divorcing his first wife Vivian (Ginnifer Goodwin), played passionately. June is not only perky and positive, but she's intelligent and firm with Johnny when it comes to her stance against his drinking and pill popping.

Many of his lyrics reflect love, heart ache, desire, but also darkness, despair and even destruction. He's a man who is forever attached to man's anguish ridden, and often times, battling psyche. As long as he's wearing black, he's singing about such conflicts, "walking the line," between sobriety and inebriation, clarity and crime, punishment and compassion. He feels empathy and warmth, where most would feel finality and coolness. This story is so colorfully depicted, even though the man always dressed in black. A challenge succeeds and surpasses our preconceived expectations. We only wish that Johnny, himself, lived with greater multi-color from within himself.

For communication lacking in his first marriage, he saves with music, a mutual passion, in his second marriage, to June. Sadly, his first wife never fully accepts that music is integral to himself and hence, their relationship, and marriage. She persistently sees his music as separate from the two of them, even attempting to stop him from hanging band photos on a room wall. At a loss, she is unable to accept him for who he is completely, a man who identifies with himself, others, and life, through lyrical stories, in music. For her own dreams to justly come true, their divorce is inevitable, as their goals, desires, and dreams are not one in the same or shared. June, a talented singer in her own right does understand and is the closest aura of light and color to shine around and within him. But, it doesn't mean that she doesn't have her own share of conflicts, with the man dressed in black. Her hesitancy to get involved with a married man shows her own struggle to remain true to her morals, and respect for herself, for him, and his marriage. When June finally weds Johnny, he is truly blessed to have a shining light to his personal sentiment, and his professional path, a singing and performing career, one she not only acknowledges and praises him for, but contributes with her own talents as well. When things are good between them, personally and professionally, things are great for all, especially their fans, but when things are bad, moments are embarrassing for themselves and their public. But even through the strife, Johnny comes out a survivor, realizing the significance of love he has with June. In a final scene, his father Ray (Robert Patrick) and grandchild are playing telephone talk, with can and string, in the Cash backyard. Johnny helps his dad out and says to him, "Pull a little tighter on the string," and we smile, thinking how Johnny is capable of tightening the meaning to his own relationships, especially the one between him and his wife. He can't change the past with his father, but he can accept the present and make the most of what good things his father can offer, as a dad and a man. What a wonderful script and touching film about such delicate subject matters, brought to life by two very thoughtfully and thoroughly engaged actors, Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon. The supporting cast is the glue that shapes the work, telling the whole story, in all of its trials and tribulations. Even if you're not a huge fan of family saga, this film might draw your own sensibilities tighter.

Sideways (2004)

Sideways - More like Intersection, between Vertical and Horizontal

[8/10 · 20 February 2006]

Sideways – More like Intersection, between Vertical and Horizontal This off beat and off color film stars Paul Giamatti, as Miles, and Thomas Haden Church, as Jack, defined as friends, as assigned college roommates, from San Diego. Miles is two years divorced from his still fresh love for Victoria (Jessica Hecht). In addition, he is a struggling to be published novelist, who's soon to be married friend, Jack plays the optimist, believing Miles' book will soon be published, or is it just an additional reason to party more. Will Conundrum, Miles' publisher confirm his doubts? Regardless, Miles' intention is to treat Jack to a "sophisticated and mellow bachelor party," in the coastal vineyards of California. Miles has a true romance with wines, especially Pino, which he describes known for its thin skin, complexity, and delicacy in cultivation. In complete contrast, Jack interprets this more refined experience, like spring break, on Ft. Lauderdale beach, as we imagine in his mind, beer flowing from the tap and ladies gone wild, just ready to romp and rumble. How do the two ever manage to enjoy each other's company? Most often, they simply don't. Miles' wish is to expose Jack to some of the finer wines, of California's coast, and Jack tells Miles that his goal is to be sure that the two of them get laid, by willing ladies, and of course celebrate the expected book deal. These characters can be likable and identifiable or completely annoying, depending on who you are and where you come from. Giamatti comes across down and blue. His melancholic tantrums are actually sweet and romantic, like when he runs down a hill with an open bottle of wine, after his friend tells him that his ex-wife has remarried, or when he is compelled to call his ex-wife from a gourmet restaurant, what is known as "drink and dial." Others may view these romantic attachment tantrums as immature, but how can't all see it as somewhat lovable? We laugh in sadness with his blues and realize how lonely life is without our one true love. Maybe there are some who can remember life without theirs.

Rusty of course, Miles makes awkward first attempts, of flirtation, with Maya (Virginia Madsen) a newly divorced cocktail waitress, studying for a college degree in ecology, whom Miles has known for several years. At Stephanie's (Sandra Oh) house, Jack's hook-up date, Miles and Maya exchange talk about wines. He tells of his deep and personal affection for Pino, whose delicate grape, bodes well in the night, from the cool Pacific breezes, that lower the temperature, just right. Maya describes her vision of wine as "living," that each day in the life of wine is different, and any day that the bottle is opened, it will taste unlike any other day that it existed, because it is living and always changing with its environment.

Church as Jack, on the other hand, is caustic, wanting to experience his "naughty side," before his marriage to fiancé, Christine, (Alysia Reiner) which all seems eerily delayed for his middle age. His blatant desire to satisfy nothing more than his sexual ego is depressing, giving Miles even more reason to be blue. Jack meets up with free and easy Stephanie, who becomes a little less than, when she learns that her new found love is soon to be married. For whatever reason, she has fallen for Jack. As a result of his deception, he suffers, painfully a broken nose, from her motorcycle helmet thrashing.

At Jack's wedding, Miles meets up with his ex-wife Victoria, and her new, handsome husband, Ken (Lee Brooks). We don't learn why his marriage to Victoria fails and that missing part, leaves us more than a little curious. His heart still cares for her. Maybe he spent too much time writing and not enough time tending to her affections, like we see him do with his wine.

Two roommates have two different sets of emotions and feelings on living life, just like two very different bottles of wine. Jack falls for wine and the vineyards, as a spring break fling. Miles has a deep and never ending affair with his relationship to wine. For the most part, each wine tasting experience is a process to gain full appreciation from what the wine has to offer, with exception of his wine remnant guzzling scene – absolutely hilarious but sad at the same time, breaking into Jack's world, similar to a beer bong guzzling with gusto teen, gone wild. But, why isn't Miles' love for a woman as passionate as it is with wine? Now we feel his blues. How do we ever manage to survive their vacation? One's a sudden sex fanatic looking for cheap thrills and the other is down and out, without a book deal or true love. Maybe Maya will be the one to console his heart? Maybe Jack's marriage will settle his restless hormones? This film isn't about ideal results. It's about all the unharmonious mishaps that Miles seems to fall into and that Jack eagerly invites, like that zany adventurous college boy, on spring break. This film won't gratify your fulfilled expectations for a happy ending, but it will leave you feeling a little less lonely, if you find your own life, sometimes sad, empty, unfulfilled or simply harmoniously challenged. Although I dream of a refined but relaxed textured, long lasting Cabernet, on a dark, cold winter's night, my current select choice is a Pino Gris, from the south of France, called Trimbach, traditional, but blended with an original and lively romantic charm, embodied with a unique, subtle swirl of soft and uplifting, fruity fluidity and naturalness.

Something's Gotta Give (2003)

Something's Gotta Give - Gives Love and Laughs

[8/10 · 20 February 2006]

Something's Gotta Give – Gives Love and Laughs Harry Sanborn (Jack Nicholson) the no-ties, younger ladies man, casually dates a classy, New York, Southampton, twenty-something, woman named, Marin Barry, (Amanda Peet), daughter to notable play write, Erica Jane Barry (Diane Keaton). When Erica seeks time away at the family's Southampton retreat, little does she know that she will find her daughter, Marin accompanied by much older boyfriend, Harry. In walks Erica with her sister, Zoe, (Frances McDormand) a funky, spunky, and lovable liberal woman's studies university professor, and in the kitchen is Harry, dressed only in his oxford shirt and underwear, standing in front of the refrigerator, reflecting upon snack food. Erica assumes Harry is a wreck loose on ecstasy, who has taken residence in their posh ocean front retreat. He explains to both ladies, that he is really Marin's boyfriend, and the two are visiting for a getaway weekend. He offers to leave, but Zoe suggests, as all being mature adults, that the four of them simply share their space. The others see her point and agree to it.

But when Marvin Gaye's, "Sexual Healing," puts Harry over the edge, into a heart attack, he finds not only his love life, roller coasting, but Erica's too. It's Harry's doctor, the 36 year old, young and virile, Julian (Kenau Reeves) who falls for the mature and successful Erica, twenty years, his senior. Erica makes a place in her heart for both of these men. Torn between two lovers, the only place to find answers it seems, is in her play writing, and even there, she is drawn to what seems to be an endless stream of tears, as she writes her current piece, "A Woman To Love," words that Harry spoke to her, after they slept together.

Who will she really choose in persuasion and feelings of the heart? We pretty much can guess the answer, at the beginning of the film, but how she arrives there is rather an interesting and often times amusing journey, as Harry thinks he is having bout after bout of additional heart attacks. Watch "Something's Gotta Give," and realize that in the end, love speaks its own language solely between two people.

Diane Keaton is poignant and classy, in her Keaton style way, adapting to two loves at once, although realizing that her heart ultimately favors one over the other. She reminds Marin that discovering love and letting it go, to grow, does not come without tears, sadness, and emotional pain. These emotions are well worth facing, if love is to be found. Amanda Peet, as Miran is just looking for a love to call her own. Realizing the age difference between her and Harry is too vast, she is happy that her mom is making the attempt for true love. Peet's role is fine, but in honesty, a little boring and romantically underdeveloped, for such a bright woman. Frances McDormand, as Zoe is very fun and refreshing and it's unfortunate that her role is so minimal. Kenau Reeves, as Julian, is surprisingly smooth and comfortable throughout his scenes with Keaton. But his "doctor's voice," deep and throaty, seems a little superficial and practiced. Though for his rehearsed vocals, his body language compensates and exceeds itself, in naturalness. For example, his dining scene with Erica and Harry, in Paris is very nice. Very fine Kenau. The sets are fabulous, warm and cozy, and come to life with the actors, who occupy their space.

In attempt for art to imitate life, Julian and Erica fly off to Paris to celebrate Erica's Birthday. But will life imitate art? That is the final question in the end? Something's Gotta Give is a well scripted, with a nicely matched cast of characters, a thoroughly enjoyable ride, one that we hope Jack's heart didn't suffer too much!

Firewall (2006)

Firewall - A Chiller of a Thriller

[9/10 · 13 February 2006]

Jack Stanfield (Harrison Ford) is a computer security manager for a major Seattle, Washington bank, in the midst of what appears to be a fairly agreeable merger. In the beautiful suburbs he resides, with his wife Beth, (Virginia Madsen) an architect, and their two children, Sarah and Andrew (Carly Schroeder) (Jimmy Bennett), along with their scruffy, but lovable dog, Rusty. Bill Cox (Paul Bettany) is a ruthless bank robber aligned with one computer savvy cohort and two thugs, whom he even despises, calling one criminal. With Bill's short temper, even his edgy helpers are easily disposable, reminding us that this story is at times, thoroughly violent and graphic. In just mere minutes, Cox's trio manages to take hostage Stanfield's family in exchange for $100 million dollars to be electronically transferred to Cox's, where else, other than an off shore account. As many are so familiar with Ford, he plays a hero, who will stop at nothing to save the gravely endangered lives of his loved ones, his family. Likewise, Bettany to the bone, upholds his acting chops. Consistent with his roles, in A Beautiful Mind and Master and Commander, and probably many others, he is able to so skillfully grasp his part, compelling the audience to interpret his character, no matter what the role, even if it is as despicable and despising as Bill Cox.

This movie's momentum is all founded upon and maintained upon the tension between Stanfield v.s. Cox and good v.s. evil. As a cold blooded killer and bank robber, Bettany completely fulfills his half of creating absolute tension and suspense, demanded for this movie to succeed at its intent, evil threatening what is good. Ford, the other half, good, is the quick thinking, slower speaking, analytical and street wise problem solver, who pushes himself right into his role, adopting all of the supporting cast in his own elemental nature, one that appears to be his by first. Simply, he is superb. What many women might say is missing, is a scene of more personal intimacy between Jack and his wife, Beth, showing us how important the love between them is. Maybe it's a dinner, an anniversary, a birthday, or possibly personal conversation exchanged before bedtime. Without this personal side revealed between the two, this thriller is even more of a chiller.

Although the script, by Joe Forte, might be criticized for being fairly simple in plot, it's Stanfield v.s. Cox that makes this film the substantial body of work that it is. Was the directing equally superb as the acting? One can't help but to think, yes. Richard Loncraine deserves a great deal of credit for making sure that Cox and Stanfield battled each other, forcefully and credibly, from each their own perspectives, to the very end of the film. Extreme well execution of direction by Loncraine, and well adapted performance, by each of main actors was evident. Cox, with extra detail, designs his frame-up to make Stanfield look guilty, even to have Jack and the police believe, that Beth Stanfield is having an affair with one of Jack's banking partners. Jack, as we expect from a Ford character, is quick to catch onto all of Cox's deceptive plots.

When Stanfield's family has been taken away by van, from their home, Ford's physical work begins. He is incredible. In the scene where he jumps from building top to patio deck, we see the passion and drive he has for saving his family. Patiently working with those less knowledgeable and strong in mind and body, is his perceptive attribute. Teaming up with the last person we would imagine, his very young, and at times, verbally frustrated secretary, the two manage to help one another, when it is needed most, reminding us that mutual perseverance holds no prejudices.

From the car explosion, to the final one on one fight scene, Ford as Stanfield, is the ultimate hero, and Bettany as Cox, the ultimate villain, everything that Loncraine was probably looking to accomplish, and did. Not often will the movie-goer see this kind of powerful one on one fight scene of good v.s. evil. It is considered incredible, and as a reminder, Ford doesn't mind sharing with his audience, that he is sixty three. In my view, the final scene, simply, was not easy. But, as an immanent hero, he's surprisingly never afraid, in the end, to show his more vulnerable side, now having us wonder how badly he's been hurt. He doesn't bleed oil. He bleeds blood and tears and he's not afraid to remind us of that.

If you're down in the dumps this Valentine's Day or many a Valentine's Day from season's past, never fear, Harrison is here. He'll literally remind you that a man is still a man, one who, when he has to, will fight to the bone, to save his wife and children. He'll rationalize, think analytically, take unknown never before risks and push his mind and body every extent, to substantiate that evil shall not prevail over the good and loving, and those whom he loves. Bettany will show himself to be a savvy, versatile actor, playing the role of Bill Cox, likely a cathartic experience to claim his own, real life goodness, one can only hope. The movie-goer to this film, won't be left in the dark this Valentine's Day. Firewall is every woman's fantasy come true, to be rescued by an intelligent, handsome and loving man, who really cares, preferably, her husband.

Zoolander (2001)

Zoolander - Colorful, Creative, Original and Thoughtful.

[10/10 · 8 September 2005]

By the exaggerated tagline, "3% body fat, and 1% brain activity," I just knew that Zoolander was going to be smart and funny. And, it was. If you can rise above the literal visual interpretation to the gasoline pump fight, you'll find it too, has an underlying educational, or at least, helpful message. The characterizations of good guy versus bad guy are whimsical, creative, colorful, and funny. Derek Zoolander, (Ben Stiller) is Ben's wonderfully exaggerated version of the male model, one who is offering his best attempt to be "Balls Models" 4th year in a row, model of the year. Sadly, he loses to Hansel, (Owen Wilson) a sweet blue, green, star eyed, soft lined, model. At the loss, quirky, carefree and complex, Derek questions his reflection in a puddle of water, "Who Am I?" In search of an answer to his question, he returns home to the coal mines of New Jersey, where his generally reluctant father, Larry Zoolander ( John Voight) and what looks to be his two evidently, (one Judah Friedlander) inarticulate brothers, reside. But, it is Derek's agent, Maury Ballstein (Jerry Stiller) who encourages him to return to New York, so that Derek can take on the assignment, as model for Mugato's (Will Ferrell) "Derelicte," campaign. Maury is passionate and sincerely wants for his models to succeed, at making a living, in modeling. Mugato is obsessed with having Derek assassinate Malaysia's prime minister, Hassan (Woodrow W. Asai), one with a fondness for fashion and vogue, and a desire to increase pay standards, in the production industry. Derek takes the job, but little does he know that Mugato's black leathered assistant, Katinka, (Milla Jovovich) will be leading him into a day spa, that is more like a torture chamber, one designed to brainwash him into assassinating Malaysia's leader. Matilada Jeffries, (Christine Taylor) a reporter for Time, assigned to reporting on fashion events, will soon find herself in the midst of discovering a personal life, originating from her professional one. And fortunately, Hansel, is more than a competitor to Derek, but a friend, who saves both Derek and the leader of Malaysia, from an untimely death.

The entire script is so creatively and colorfully articulated and presented, that one cannot help but have just so much fun, or alternatively be filled with suspense, as to whether or not Mugato will have his way with Derek. David Duchovny's scene, (mystery man on the cell phone), as scruffy bearded, eye glassed, and glass encased hand, J.P. Prewitt, at the cemetery, is really well done. In an interestingly woven monologue, he begins by explaining buried models' pre-mature deaths, scenes that include butt cheeks and abs sculpted on gravestones. It's very Tim "Robbinseque" in mood and tone and very well performed.

Zoolander was much more rich in plot, characterization, and development than I had expected, after hearing, that "it didn't get great reviews." And the story still results in a very happy ending. Good wins over evil, and good guy hero gets girl. So who is Derek Zoolander? Answer: A really sweet guy, who is cute, funny, sensitive, articulate (although can't say eulogy, and instead says ulogee, but just adds more to his cute and funny attributes), and one who, we gather, has a terrific girlfriend, and cool best friend, with whom he pursues one of his true life long passions, to open up a school for kids, "to read really good." Zoolander is absolutely a "hip"comedy for every audience member.

War of the Worlds (2005)

War of the Worlds - People toying with humanity and nature.

[8/10 · 5 July 2005]

War of the Worlds is a science fiction film much more comprehensible than the poorly depicted book by H.G. Wells, upon which the film is based. Mechanical, laser cutting, liquid spewing, long tentacle armed aliens prey upon unsuspecting people of the east coast, including New York, New Jersey and Boston. It appears they suck human blood only to spill it out, making things of nature, like vines on trees, grow at an insurmountable rate, all in red blood.

The movie begins with Ray Ferrier's (Tom Cruise) taking care of his two children Robbie ( Justin Chatwin) and Rachel (Dakota Fanning), while their pregnant mother, Mary Ann (Miranda Otto) and her second husband, Tim are making a trip to visit parents, I believe. Tom's role as lower-middle income father, is quite possibly more credibly evil, than his last summer's character, Vincent, in "Collateral." He is careless with petite, but strong, Rachel and flat out rude to teen son, Robbie. With Rachel, he neglects to help her out of the van or to thoughtfully watch over her at home, even telling her to order take out for dinner, from his, what looks to be battered lazy boy chair. And with Robbie, he simply throws the baseball, a little too hard in play, possibly thinking that he can toughen up or make his son "a man," on one pitch. But regardless of his poor fathering skills, ultimately he hawks over his children, at the onslaught of an alien invasion and will stop at nothing to protect them.

Even with the east coast under alien siege, the film manages to clearly and methodically focus upon one family's struggle to escape the quite seriously deadly attacks. But one cannot deny that there are just a few unanswered questions that distract us from events feeling authentic, such as why does not the news media arrive at any scene much sooner, if only for a moment, until with more precise accumulated actualized drama, we see for ourselves that the power is lost? Or why doesn't Ray turn on the TV., at his ex-wive's house, to find out what is transpiring around him? Why does his vehicle work, but no one else's does? Is it because he has an older model van, without an electronic key lock? Certainly, he couldn't be the only citizen driving an older manual door lock vehicle? A CBS news woman finally presents herself in the film, but it is too little and too late to capture our minds, as any real experience. But beyond some obvious questions, without logical answers, we are still intrigued by a never seen before alien invasion upon the community, and specifically the stars of the film, the Ferriers. Dakota Fanning doesn't just get a gold medal, but something more like a diamond ring, for having to act out every heart-racing scene, for which she is a part. Robbie, something like her would be alter ego, on the other hand, is just taking the invasion as it comes, stepping out of the circle of reaction, just to be in the midst. The special effects and the action scenes are really incredible. When the ferry turns over, and the family falls first into the water, followed by a car spilling fast right into them, we can't imagine this family surviving, but they do. For them, scenes such as this one, must be like Fear Factor, to the nth degree.

In one part, Ray and Rachel, Robbie now left for dead, take shelter in the basement of a man's home. Olgilvy (Tim Robbins) is dueling with his psyche, wanting not to be hurt by the aliens, but at the same time, wanting to madly make a show and fight them, above ground. It is his carrying on delusional state, which puts them all in jeopardy. Ray, analytically minded must silence him, in order to protect, first and foremost, as he states, his daughter. When Olgilvy finally strikes Ray with a shovel, he puts an end to this impending sadly dangerous threat. From dumpy dad to something of his own healthy heroism, he turns. Ray blindfolds his daughter and behind closed doors, we can only imagine, but do not know for sure, that he has terminated Olgilvy's life. Now it is quiet, a place that will not attract the carnivorous and human flesh eating aliens. Steven Spielberg, it appears, uses his strength to let the actors really infuse their own spirit and authenticity into each role, which gives breathing room to creativity. Although sometimes we feel that the actors are struggling too much in their own lives, and instead we're watching them, rather than the characters that they are portraying, which detracts a little from that of becoming and playing another character.

It is not without the help of ground force army troops that civilization has a chance to survive. Do aliens take over the east coast, or does humanity prevail? Watch the film and discover for yourself, how justice is served, in a mind bending metaphor.

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (1991)

Robin Hood - An Unsuspecting Prince of the Forest, Part I of II

[9/10 · 2 April 2005]

Ah Robin Hood, of Locksley (Kevin Costner). How I warmed up to one inventive battle scene after another. Robin floats onto a bareback horse and slides, just as easily off of it, making it look so simple to the eyes of inexperience. It was the most playful infused sword, bow and arrow, swash buckling film, I have seen, in some time. Never have I so freely giggled among violence, gore, conniving, stabbings, evil-doers and really neat homemade and makeshift war defense mechanisms. Why you ask? It must have been a free and easy going, almost coasting, but not quite, and truly authentic Robin (of Locksley) Hood. It was the man who inspired English dwelling "outcasts," to make a better life for themselves, even amid turmoil and corruption, in the beautiful and scenic Nottingham, England.

The film opens with a concise paragraph on relevant history of the time and setting. King Richard, "The Lion Heart," of England, (unidentified actor) 800 years ago, is fighting to reclaim the Holy Land, Jerusalem, Israel, from the Turks. But from the film's start, mutiny unfolds, when the Nottingham Sheriff (Alan Rickman) and his group conspire and hang Richard. In 1193 or 1194, Richard's son, Robin is barely alive, as he and his cell mate Azeem (Morgan Freeman), a native South African and follower of Islam, together, plan their escape from the dark dungeon, in Jerusalem. Azeem feeling indebted to Robin, for helping save his life, now follows Robin, whom he calls Christian, offering, not only guidance, encouragement and wisdom's truth, but a huge helping hand in defending off bad guys, with his machete knife. Freeman offers a soft center, comfort, support, spirituality, and home, not of permanence, but of every evolving comprehension. You cannot help but to identify with his essence, both on stage and off of it.

Robin's purpose becomes threefold: 1) avenge his father's untimely death, and as usual, defend and save the family name, which means defeating the evil Sheriff of Nottingham 2) motivate forest dwellers to defend their life, among natural riches and resources of the forest, and finally, 3) enjoy some adventure while aiding the forest community to claim victory over a disorganized and corrupt government, lead by interim leader, the Sheriff.

Robin succeeds on all three levels, instilling confidence, courage, will power and dignity to him and all those whom he teaches not only to defend their livelihood, but to comfortably and satisfyingly live, within the community they cultivate. Somehow, when there is a common objective, that being to fight off the bad guy, everyone pulls together that much quicker and friendlier, pushing prior pettiness aside. But not all feel perfectly content with Robin's influence, and that is why there is the character, Will Scarlett (Christian Slater). He is not one to easily adapt to the new productive forest companions that had not existed as such, prior to Robin's subtle and persuasive entrance.

By the middle of the film, Robin is clearly living within the world he sees magically taking shape, by his voluntary direction and people's free will. As in every "classic hero" movie, the credibility and portrayal of the of the anti-hero, or evil bad guy is critically instrumental to both the hero's and the film's success. Fortunately, Alan Rickman is incredibly fabulous and pulls forth all his weight, in embodying the sinister Sheriff. Believe it or not, he has a glimmer of sex appeal, with his jet-black head and facial hair, and strong presence; but we acknowledge him more, as we are supposed to, with the credibility of his pervasive evilness. Kevin Reynolds, the film's Director, clearly knows how to completely bring to life, the evil guy. In the Sheriff, that slight sexiness and sad vulnerability draws us in more readily and actively to the dark side of the anti-hero, in a more personal way. The Sheriff's wicked and witch looking cohort admits to being his mother. Surrounded by her witchcraft, in a dark room, far from a more civilized nature, she adds her punch to the evil bunch. Clearly, Kevin Reynolds not only knows what he wants from the actors, as far as portrayal, but it appears that he makes sure that every single one successfully acts with the intended purpose, to credibly entertain the audience, by offering us more laughs than we first thought imaginable. It did feel like Kevin, as Robin, did not really offer himself over to the character, for the first 30 minutes or so, to the film, or he may have been attempting, but seemed to need a firmer direction. Nevertheless, we dismiss his weak introductory delivery, for the character he becomes, as the film develops more completely. It seemed as if the extras, ironically, were having so much fun in the battle scenes, that it might have become contagious and shone forth in great acting, among all involved, but particularly for Kevin, whose screen play became almost addictive for the watching audience. In one of the concluding battle scenes, I could not help but notice his eyes yielding to subtle magic, of all before him. On his platform of battle stance, his eyes unconsciously wove a passive and active fabric, and I saw the truth of playful boy, whose eyes smiled upon his conscientious cast mates in battle, all of whom he now connected by more than duty, but by shared spirit. Now his vision was clearly that of Robin Hood, and we could all be so proud and romanticized, at the same time.(see Robin Hood, part II for remaining Movie Talk)

Are We There Yet? (2005)

Are We There Yet? A fact filled, act filled, and fiction filled reality check. check

[7/10 · 6 February 2005]

"Are We There Yet," is a film that offers its audience, a sense of balance via variety, in character development, through an entertaining plot of high level prank infused kids and one quiet heavy heart, searching for love, in suburbia Oregon. In general, one could either more clearly identify with the main character, Nick Persons (Ice Cube) or alternatively with the sassy mischievous Kevin (Philip Bolden) and Lindsey Kingston (Aleisha Allen) children to special events planner, Suzanne Kingston. She is a single Mom, who is enamored by Nick, a rare sports memorabilia shop owner. Nick is a former professional baseball player from St. Louis, who had moved to Oregon to play ball, but an army injury places him into retirement. He would love to romance Suzanne, but the only problem is, he says that he is not fond of children. We feel his sense of hurry to experience a woman's love and not necessarily, with her children too, in the onset of his intentions. He seeks his chance to win her affection, by attempting to gain the children's first, one of his tougher challenges. When Suzanne's ex-husband Frank tells Suzanne he is sick and can't care for the kids, while she is in the midst of leaving for her special events business trip, Nick steps in by offering to chaperon the kids on a trip to Vancouver, and finally, meeting up with their Mom. Now, the audience climbs aboard the roller coaster, with a reasonable slightly cranky, almost fifty bachelor and two very precocious and yes, one must admit, at times bratty and unnerving children.

When the plane and train ride plans fall awry, Nick's jumbo black Lincoln Navigator, with shiny silver dual spinning action hub caps and creamy leather interior, comes to the rescue, until that is, it becomes trashed through an array of mishaps, catastrophes, and unforeseeable events. Nick even accents the dashboard with his baseball bobble head of baseball player, Satchel Paige, who comes equipped with animated voice and opinions, played by Tracy Morgan. Paige represents something like a demon ego to Nick. If you are thinking that the film sounds too predictable with the character portrayal of rebellious children and wanna be boyfriend doing huge favor, to get girl, you will have no idea how completely beyond trashed the Lincoln Navigator will become. I guarantee it will surprise you every step of the way. It is a main stay prop around which much of the humor is designed.

For the adults, Ice Cube as Nick, is the main feature. I was disappointed that Jay Mohr, as Marty, sales associate friend of Nick's, did not have a more involved role. Nick is the real, identifiable, understandably annoyed bachelor, with fifty hanging over him, and just wants a relationship with a woman, and unfortunately, not first and foremost, with her children. His desires and intentions are totally relatable. But to have Suzanne's heart, he finds that she comes complete with children and not so polite ones, at that. For the children of the audience, at least in my showing, they were pretty much laughing at every kid stunt, along the way. All I could think of was, poor Nick and at the same time, thinking that I am in a good reality check, watching these kids in the film act out, and the audience kids' response to them. So I say to myself, "let them laugh!" I can remember my dad taking my sister and me to see the movie "Porky's." I can't attest to my sister, but I was intrigued, interested, and laughing for the first ten minutes of the film, while my dad was obviously not. I felt betrayed being marched out of the movie, after only ten minutes, for laughing at, of all things related to boys, girls, and sex. God forbid! I wonder if my dad would have made a better tormented preacher, than a lawyer.

Granted, I felt that character depth and relationships in "So Are We There Yet," ran a little too shallow, within the film, serving not to its advantage, but nevertheless, with the constant stream of things going wrong on this now road trip, there wasn't much time left to think about touching kid/adult bonding. But, when the kids stop by their dad Frank's house, they are in for a saddened surprise, and Nick is the one to help them work it out. Solving their arguments and mishaps substituted itself for the traditional kind of bonding, which we imagine happening sometime after the movie. Some might agree that it's not how you get there, that so important, but that it is that you get there – where you all want to be. Or others might say, it's the journey that is just as rich and rewarding as the goal itself. Underlying this film one might identify with the implied symbolism of heavy v.s. light, or Lincoln Navigator v.s. flawed children of single working mother. At the end of this last boxing round, Nick takes home the winner, as his prize. It implies that understanding the soul of another person completely takes precedent over any material possession. The seed to happiness is not owning a vehicle, but rather understanding and being understood, by another. Through out the movie, children and adults were laughing, albeit, not necessarily at the same time, but nevertheless, it was a great way to be either involved in an entire process, or possibly just cultivate the patience for it.

Spanglish (2004)

Spanglish - Flor is cut short of Flourishing, and English spans the globe.

[7/10 · 23 December 2004]

Spanglish is beach-side Malibu family saga movie with potential to draw us closer, but James Brooks' script spreads itself too thin, so that key parts are left either unexplored, or only touched upon, all too briefly. The audience doesn't really feel on board this family saga roller coaster ride, and if we don't feel it, then we really aren't experiencing it, the way we ought to. My list of parts that need more attention: • Deborah's (Tea Leoni) son Georgie (Ian Hyland), the looking neglected child • Deborah's affair with the Realtor, only a glimpse of him in his convertible • Deborah's complex about not feeling useful or successful in a professional job • Flor's (Paz Vega) hang-up on exposing, her daughter Cristina (Victoria Luna and Shelbie Bruce), to normal American kid-life • John's drinking tendency and never being at work • Why does Deborah dote on Cristina, and never includes her own daughter, Bernice, "Bernie," (Sarah Steele) in the girls' day out on the town? • Flor's magical transition from speaking no English to speaking it fluently with John, (Adam Sandler) in an intimate night, at his restaurant. Maybe she took a Berlitz course, when no one was noticing?

Deborah's affair was a key turning point in the film. John is so upset at Deborah, that he cannot be in the same room with her and has to leave the house, driving himself into hypocrisy, where he wines, dines and cuddles Flor the house help. Obviously, he is just as weak as Deborah, at holding onto marital fidelity. Glumly sinking into his own feelings of despair, in response to Deborah's affair, was just the opportunity of exit he was looking for, to spend some hurt puppy dog time with Flor. Obviously, you can see it bothered me that when Deborah cried the truth of her affair, John, in turn, wasn't willing to admit, his warm and comforting crush on Flor? I guess, it was just more time for Deborah to beat herself up over the situation.

Poor Deborah is flying in and out of the house, and the audience is only speculating she is having an affair. We don't really know it until she confides in John. Why is Deborah portrayed as the loose floozy on the go, while John gets to wade in the warm pools of innuendo with the lovely, but culturally confused, Flor? Maybe Deborah should have had an affair with the pool boy, much less work for her, and John could be flying long distance, maintaining a buff chest and shedding the puppy dog style for that of a tiger. Yeah, I like that idea better.

Category: More trivial talk –

• Why was Deborah always concerned about other people's appearances, like strangers she did not even know? I guess the answer would be some where far out there in the response of "whatever." • After having not one but two children, and beyond her young adult years wouldn't she be getting a grip on feeling comfortable with her weight and being more as one with her body? • When Deborah was on top of John, I wasn't sure if she was really having sex with him (thinking of when Harry met Sally); but then it looked like she was; I laughed a lot at her orgasm; Yeah Tea! It was much more colorful, exuberant and exciting to watch than Bill Macy's in "The Cooler." The orgasm scene in and of itself was enough to make every woman walk away from the theatre feeling profoundly liberated. Yeah! We like orgasm gone wild, Sally style, in its plump and overweight motif, even if the husband, is a body pancake, on the bed. Hence, reason for Realtor on the side. Orgasm achieved in film – check.

The film concludes with no dramatic surprises. Everyone ends up where we expect, for better or for worse. Adam Sandler does a wonderful job at playing a marsh-mellow Dad, husband, and a man of weak indulgences – booze and housekeeper lusting. Cloris Leachman, as Evelyn, the Grandmother does a fine job of drinking wine and comforting family members. That sounded funny, I know, but its true. It would have been nice to see her doing something a little more playful with the Grandchildren or a man she has a thing for, but I suppose that was her prerogative, not to ask James, to add a play scene in for her. Each and every performance is well portrayed for the quirky, unraveling feel type of script. Sometimes it looks good and feels good to come loose at the seams and this film accomplishes exactly that – which is symbolized by Flor letting out the buttons to Bernie's size eight jacket. Viola, now more than size 8!

Meet the Fockers (2004)

Meet The Fockers - Feels retro...Feels fun!

[7/10 · 23 December 2004]

Meet the Fockers is a continuing saga of Meet the Parents. In this film, Pam Byrnes' (Teri Polo) parents, Dina and Jack, (Blythe Danner and Robert Di Niro) meet Greg/Gaylord Focker's (Ben Stiller) parents, Roz and Bernie (Barbra Streisand and Dustin Hoffman). Greg, Pam, and Dina all road trip in Jack's custom RV, which looks more like a music band touring bus or "liberty coach" bus, accompanied by hidden CIA spy gadgetry. Roz and Bernie live in an eclectic tropical themed Miami home. Roz is a senior sex therapist, and Bernie is a retired trial attorney, who has found his touchy feely side, probably through his wife's advocacy of verbally and physically, expressing the emotional self. Barbra plays the role super. I feel like if she was asking me the intimate questions, like Dina, I actually wouldn't have any problem giving her answers, since her nature presents itself easy and helpful. Any over analysis would make me laugh in a good session of comic relief.

When the families meet, it is sort of like the Flintstones – Wilma and Fred (Fockers) meet the Bunkers – Edith and Archie (Byrnes). As for Bernie, he is so out in left field that I can't quite pass shock before finding laughter. But really, I still find laughter. The last movie I saw him in was Confidence, so it could have slowed my creative leap reflexes. Dina is the usual attention starved wife, from her husband Jack, who now appears to have an obsessive/compulsive fetish, with caring for their grandchild, little Jack. I wish Dina had a stronger role, possibly showing how she can rise above pouting over her husband's lack of obvious intimacy, and finding something that she likes, that will in turn, somehow have him take a better notice to his failings, in intimately recognizing her, sort of in that Vanessa and Austin Powers type of mode. Greg is portrayed as too much of the underdog, by Jack's regimented routine and his mother's free sex style questioning. Further, he thinks that he might be the father, to the exotic Hispanic cook, Isabel's (Alana Ubach) son. Even his Dad's homemade Greg wall shrine completely embarrasses Greg. Poor Greg. (sounds good in Marsha tone.) We look at him having the most fun when he is injected with sodium penathol, by Jack, since for most of the movie, he is suffering from family idiosyncrasy overload. Poor Greg (in regular concerned tone.) Much of the comedy attempts to center jokes around little grandchild Jack, which seems to be an odd emphasis, and misdirection. Maybe it reflects the situation when parents or grandparents do not have much going on in their own lives, so a child becomes a center to their world, which is an obvious intended comic hook, to the film. But, the idea does not play out all too funny.

The feeling of actor improvisation gives the film that more carefree and unscripted vibe, but nevertheless, the script in its entirety, never truly reaches full funny bone status, though good intentions are evidently prevalent. (How intellectually nerdy was that synopsis.) I enjoy all of these actors so much, and even more, for the fact that some having played serious roles, gladly warmed themselves up to moving, yet again, into the comedy role. The film may not have offered complete jelly-belly laughing humor to its audience, but it may have well offered "senior" sex tips to those in the frozen or frustration zone, thanks in part to the lead instructor, Roz! It's never too soon to start thinking about signing up for co-educational couples yoga.

National Treasure (2004)

National Treasure - many of song has sung - themes on finding home.

[23 November 2004]

Some spoiler material. National Treasure is really a socially driven film, documenting Nic Cage's quest as Ben Franklin Gates, to reclaim the family name and declare independence, by tracking down the legacy of long lost treasure, associated with his family heritage, and with some of the proceeds, buys an estate of his own, in the company of a most lovely lady, Abigail Chase, (Diane Kruger). This film is really about Nic and not Ben, but I am o.k. with that, as long as I accept it for what it is, rather than what it isn't. The title National Treasure peaked my interest, since I wanted to know what Disney's interpretation as to what the National Treasure actually was. I was telling my pretend children that National Treasure is not gold or material possessions, but that National Treasure is your spirit and the love in your heart. I told them that each and every one of us make up the total of National Treasure. Nevertheless, I still wanted to see the movie, so on a Monday morning, after numerous transfers and holds, with Microsoft's Technical Support helpline, I was hoping that National Treasure would be just as productive as an afternoon, at a slow moving, but informative teacher/business seminar. Seminars are great for those people on the payroll who can spend the time with it. Likewise, I recommend this movie to only people who can and want to spend the time.

The film begins in Washington D.C., in 1974, with John Adam Gates(Christopher Plummer), as Ben's grandfather, telling little Ben (Hunter Gomez) about the family legacy, of hidden treasure that was smuggled from Europe to America. It was sacred to the Masons and Knights Templar. When you see the size of the alleged treasures, you think, who could have possibly stored them, where they were, without anyone getting word of it. That part is funny. But if we can continue on with the legend, a key element was that the treasure had to be protected from British invaders. But then I am thinking. Why just the British? Don't segment a possible threat. Protect the treasure from any and all possible dangers, one's that might be worse than just a British invasion.

Jerry Bruckheimer, as most known producer, can start checking off his list, 'created enough action, suspense, near death experience, including explosions, with A-list star, Nic Cage. High class, black tie social event – done. Retail shopping experience, with woman – completed.' All of Nic's action stuff, moves at a snappy, groovin' and cycloptic pace, with his goal of not only wanting to be the hero, but the realization that he is the hero, as he moves with stealth, to capture the physical treasure, to compliment, that which already resides in his heart. Ben's assistant Riley, (Justin Bartha) is an intellectual easy go with the flow admirer, to the action hero. Together, they approach Abigail Chase, a pretty, hold her own, seeming unattended to, maybe even a little dusty, Washington D.C. archivist.

Ben introduces himself to Abigail, as Paul Brown. He tells her that there is an invisible treasure map, on the back of the Declaration of Independence. She is in disbelief and he walks away deciding that he must steal the map, with Riley's help, in order to find the buried treasure, reclaiming the Gates family name and satisfying his curious needs.

Of course, one of Ben's partners, Ian Howe (Sean Bean) turns 'bad guy'on him, fighting to claim the treasure for himself. So the chase plays out between good guys, bad guys, and the damsel in distress, Abigail, who is tossed in the mix, for good measure and of course, romance. ' Check – romance completed, including, unexpected hero/heroine kiss.'

John Voight, as Patrick Gates, Ben's Dad, plays the treasure hunter retiree very well. As a widower, we only wish that he had a lady friend, as to not make him look so dour. Harvey Keital, (Sadusky) equally, does a nice job playing out the cop role, reminding Ben, a little too often that 'Someone has got to go to jail for stealing the Declaration of Independence.' Certainly not Ben/Nic, but Sadusky needles him, nevertheless.

I am actually disappointed that there actually is a tomb, 'Beneath Parksville Lane,' in Boston, what looks to be a collection of international proportion, of historical treasures from Rome to Egypt. It looks like Disney's old prop and stage storage closet. From the audience's view, it all appears a little too fake, corn ball, and odd ball. I was hoping for a more symbolic treasure, like that of Dan Brown's in, The Da Vinci Code. Maybe Ben, named himself Brown, after Dan, pretending to be his brother. I do not have the answers. I just like to make-up stuff. With some of the proceeds from the treasure sale, Ben buys his country estate for Abigail and him, and Riley, with the prospect of more action work in front of him, settles on the red sports car, what looks to be something like a Dodge viper. I think some of the bruised British egos would have laughed if the film shot Ben's and Abigail's country estate wedding. Then, the movie really would have come full circle and Jerry could have checked off his list, 'touch of British charm and modesty – completed.'

The clues for the treasure hunt are well established, like those I recall from my childhood Birthdays, and in the end, Ben, Riley, and Abigail are awarded prizes. Yeah! That is nice. Maybe the film should have been called Ben Gate's Birthday Party – everyone's invited, even the mean kids. As you can see, I have mixed emotions on the male driven process, to which Nic feels he has to or wants to act out, in order to achieve the underlying theme of love, peace, and capturing the girl's heart, or being captured in the heart, by the girl. Really, Disney could have saved loads of money by making a deal with HG t.v. – Hollywood Stars Go House Hunting. Nic could be the guest star and the show could insert clips of Valley Girl, probably my all-time favorite teen movie, (even then, I was more like the guy, punk guy that is, rather than the cream lacy bloused girl, who had totally cool parents, and was adored by the boys, including the lead star. I had the short hair cut, style, and family gone wrong. I guess that is why I identified with his awkwardness and out of place, as so charming.) and a few other retro-feel Cage films, to personalize the segment. The Star House Hunting program would be a less timely and a more accessible form of programming, for those people who do not have the time to do the seminar format, like myself.

At the film's conclusion, I was sentimentally sad, since Jerry seemed to be like an overworked Jewish man, turned Santa, checking off all the tasks to accomplish on his list. I guess that was the only way to ensure all presents were sent and received. Cormac and and Marianne Wibberley were like Santa's elves, assembling just the right Christmas gifts. Yeah! Maybe Jerry, crew and cast should read John Grisham's Skipping Christmas book. I have not read it, but I am sure that it must hold some relevancy to the feeling of Christmas burn-out. In my mind, I make up my own imaginary ending, with Jerry and cast, in front of the estate, waving and saying, 'Merry Christmas to All, and to all a good night,' with winks and sparkles in their eyes.

Collateral (2004)

Hero, Hit Man, or just your ordinary Joe making a living?

[8 August 2004]

What happens when a hero plays a hit man? Persuasion, but not belief, that Tom Cruise (Vincent) could possibly be born from the killer's mold, at least not in 'Collateral,' at least not from just departing from his huge previous role, as Nathan Allgren, in 'The Last Samurai.' If anything Tom remains the hero, even as the villain, since he executes his acting assignment, with his die hard passion and professionalism. Regardless of these two strengths, I am never believing Tom, as Vincent, to be so evil, as he is directed to be. Yet, undoubtedly Tom makes the most of this character, carrying the role as far as he possibly can, within the designed framework presented.

With unfortunate holes and fragments in the script, Tom's jump from 'The Last Samurai,' to 'Collateral,' is too Olympic for me to believe him, as the completely uninhibited hit-man, Vincent. Yet, it still does not mean that this film does not possess solid attributes. What I did experience in this film was a sense of commitment from every actor to carry out his role, with duty, unity, and a seasoned maturity.

In the film, Tom plays a somewhat sallow and gaunt faced L.A. hit man, whose job it is to kill off a prosecutor's list of crooked witnesses, involved in the illegal drug dealing business. Jada Pinkett Smith plays Annie, the smart and probably I imagine typically overworked prosecutor. She is the first person to ride in Max's (Jamie Foxx) taxi. She and Max exchange typical life conversation. At the end of the ride, he gives her his treasured island post card, and she, in turn, gives him her business card, with a gesture of gratitude.

Meanwhile, in just a moment, Vincent steps from inside of the airport, to any cab outside along the curb. He randomly chooses Max's cab. Likewise, Max and Vincent make small talk. At this moment, the actors are in full swing with their roles. The conversation sounds so unscripted, that I am wondering at times if it is, at times. Vincent tells Max that he is having to make several stops, collecting signatures for some sort of real estate transactions. I thought it humorous that Vincent, Anne, and Max knew every inch to streets and directions around L.A., that it became an exaggerated after thought of mine.

From this point forward, Vincent forces Max to be his assistant, in executing the completely emotionless killings, like simply pulling weeds from the lawn. They make various shooting stops, including a Jazz bar and a Japanese style dance club. Mark Ruffalo, as the ever skeptical Detective Fanning, is assigned to solving the string of murders and soon has to work with alleged Federal Agent, Pedrosa (Bruce McGill) and crew. This scene moves so fast that I am not completely sure if Pedros is really working for the FBI or really for Felix, Vincent's client. When Max has to confront Vincent's client, the story begins to unravel for two reasons. First, the script begins to reveal too many unwanted holes. For example, we gain little knowledge into understanding Vincent's client Felix (Javier Barden) and the hit list of witnesses. Obviously, too many details may detract from the larger story, but too few details falls short of supporting a credible story line and cast of characters. Also, too many supporting cast members are just immediately tossed into scenes without more consideration to feature film length form of development. In a completely developed script, the viewer should not have to be needing more plot information to identify with the chain of events set before them. Secondly, a solid fast paced film will always reiterate some key plot facts to its audience, knowing that they may miss a piece of elemental information, among all of the action and activity. This concept particularly applies to murder, mystery, and action films.

Mark Ruffalo plays with all of his eerie and far at sea-like sensibility, but like many in the film, at moments, I feel an underlying sense of the actors' conflict between wanting to deliver their lines and having to deliver them. I, myself, on many occasions have been pinned down to take jobs, with logical reluctance. But, at this point, I know it to be just a fact of living life. Regardless of how everyone 'gets the job,' everyone involved acts with total commitment to performing. The script is not what makes all of these humans hero's, rather it is their adapt willingness to play out the roles, as directed.

Out of all the scenes, the duality unfolding in the Japanese style club was most unique. In my college and early post college days, I walked through that scene more than I like to have to admit. I wonder if Tom was thinking and feeling what I once was, in the days trying to convince myself, that I could actually socialize, in smoky bars and new wave/age dance halls/clubs, like the majority of the people. Every place was so crowded and loud, as my eyes were only searching for some imaginary someone, to share my quietness, peace, and space. Repeatedly, I was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and so was Vincent. Yet, when Tom pulls out his back on the floor gun maneuver, I responded like a teenage boy, thinking to myself, cool, wow, only in the movies, and his rock solid actions instantaneously shift the mood. I have to remind myself that he is the villain, in this role, but also an actor who truly has command, reflex, and skill to completely shift the scales of extreme, in this scene

Whether or not you like this script and story line, you will not be disappointed in the depth, commitment, and common unity each actor willingly offers to portraying his role.