Change Your Image
jpd-5
Reviews
Holes (2003)
If Your IQ is Over Room Temperature, Avoid Holes
This movie is boring. Real boring. The story development makes glaciers seem speedy by comparison. There are lots of aging stars and several young stars, but a plethora of stars cannot compensate for the weak story. The writing is uninteresting, uninspired, undeveloped and untalented. I hope the author's literary skills improve in the third grade.
I can't tell you much about the movie as I lost interest within 20 minutes and hit the eject. Thank Goodness something interesting was on satellite..... test patterns.
As far as I'm concerned, Holes is much ado about nothing.
0/1000
Escanaba in da Moonlight (2001)
It's Not the Worst Movie I've Watched - But it's Close
I actually watched this movie from start to finish. Normally, I walk out of the theater or eject the DVD when a movie sucks this bad. But, Escanaba starts off kinda funny, so I thought the movie just had a bad segment. The bad segment lasts for 2/3 of the movie.
Escanaba starts off in an interesting fashion, albeit decidedly weird and then dies before your eyes. Maybe you need to be from Michigan to appreciate this movie. Perhaps, massive quantities of beer would help to make this movie good. Although, I think the opportunity for the obvious solution is past: Don't waste the film, or if you must make this movie, then hire a writer.
If you appreciate good comedies, rent something else, as this movie is just weird, not funny.
Full Disclosure (2001)
Drags Like an Alligator's Tail
**Spoilers Ahead**
Something just doesn't work in this movie. It has a good story line and some strong characters, but something keeps it from rising out of the "poor" to the "good" category. I suspect the missing element is a good director. Maybe a writer could have helped, too.
There are some good moments in the film. Penelope Ann Miller plays a great villain. She interrogates her victims with some real dark humor. I didn't know whether to laugh or cringe. My dreams of her showing up at my door, would now be nightmares.
The ending was enough to cause stomach distress. Ah, yes, Love Conquers All. Grow Up! The escape in the light jet is also far fetched. It's been a few years since I flew jets, but the preflight check and spooling up the engines takes a few minutes. Besides, I think the FBI could find one F-18 to persuade them to turn around, or the CIA could have used a Sidewinder as the solution to their problem.
Almost anything could have improved the ending.
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Bring Your No Doze
I loved Austin Powers 1 and 2. I eagerly awaited this one. The trailers looked funny and a spoof on Gold Finger sounded perfect. I was sorely disappointed. This movie just doesn't work. Goldmember is a poor sequel to Austin Powers 1 and 2. The humor has digressed from the realm of clever to stupid. Wait for this one on video, it's not worth the price of admission. (By the Way: Rent it, don't buy it)
Wo hu cang long (2000)
Boring, Really Boring
I do not see the appeal of this movie. The story is more suited for a child's book than a feature film. Great for bedtime stories, as it would bore them to sleep in a jiffy.
The fight scenes are ridiculous. Jumping, flying and kicking like a poorly choreographed ballet (a ballet for lumbering cattle). I would like to have seen a real martial arts master like Bruce Li walk in and really kick their slow, clumsy butts. Heck, my 16 year old kid could kick their butts.
The "flying" is really dumb. The "actors" legs dangle in the air like in a amateur presentation of Peter Pan. Just don't expect the acting to be on par with the average high school presentation.
I saw this on a long flight and considered walking out, but the 6 mile drop dissuaded me. Come to think of it, Crouching Tiger made the flight seem longer.
2/10 The scenery is good. The rest of the movie isn't.
The Fast and the Furious (2001)
It's not bad, it's awful
**No spoilers here - I couldn't spoil this movie**
I wouldn't say The Fast and Furious is a bad movie, as someone might think I intended "bad" to be "good". It is the antithesis of good.
What I didn't like: The acting is horrible. The plot is non-existent. The dialogue is stupid. The love interest isn't interesting. The stunt driving is ridiculous. It takes "10 second" cars a couple minutes to go a quarter mile.
What I liked: (this space intentionally left blank)
I love cars. I love car movies. The Fast and Furious is boring and stupid.
I enjoyed the closing credits the most. But I watched them with the sound down to avoid the crap soundtrack. All in all, this is a total waste of time and film.
0/10
What Women Want (2000)
Starts Off Strong and Builds up to a Weak Ending
What Women Want starts off strong and then fizzles out. It seems to loose momentum after the first hour. The ending is lame. Did the writers quit midway through the movie?
Mel Gibson plays Nick Marshall an advertising executive who receives the "gift" of hearing women's thoughts. He can even hear female dogs thinking. This is really cute. Nick thinks he flipped and visits a Psychoanalyst (Bette Midler). The scene in the doctor's office is funny and almost works.
Meanwhile, back in the office, Nick is passed over for a promotion. This promotion is given to Darcy (Helen Hunt). Nick sets out to undermine Darcy hoping to get her job. Nick and Darcy start off not liking one another, and no one cares if they ever get past that stage.
Beautiful and talented Marisa Tomei is relegated to the minor role of Lola, while Helen Hunt, who is neither beautiful nor talented is the love interest for Nick. Go Figure. The consensus among my friends is no normal man would be interested in Helen Hunt when Marisa is even a remote chance.
What Women Want is a cute premise, but it just doesn't work.
I give it a 6. Based on 9 for the first half and 3 for the last half.
Thirteen Days (2000)
Gripping Story of 13 Days on the brink of Nuclear War
Thirteen Days provides us with an eyewitness account of the Cuban Missile Crisis; the two-week period in 1962 when the US and the USSR came perilously close to the brink of nuclear war. Overall, Thirteen Days is entertaining with a strong screenplay and dynamic cast. Days will not appeal to everyone, as most of the action is through dialog, and the movie is lengthy, so an interest in history is a prerequisite. The film provides insight on the conversations that are historic and others that may have occurred between JFK, his advisors and the members of the cabinet.
Bruce Geenwood is excellent as JFK. His accent is perfect. Steven Culp portrays a very believable Bobby Kennedy. Kevin Costner is adequate as Kenny O'Donnell The inclusion of Adlai Stevenson's oratory to the UN is excellent, "I am prepared to wait for the answer until Hell freezes over".
The story is faithful to history by Hollywood standards. John Kennedy is portrayed as indecisive and uncertain. The military cabinet is depicted as sinister and suspecting Kennedy of being weak. Kennedy was often weak and indecisive. JFK was a popular President, but he was not a strong leader. The military leaders had good reason to suspect Kennedy of indecision and cowardice. After all, JFK supported the Bay of Pigs invasion, sending 1500 US trained Cuban Exiles to invade Cuba - until it failed. JFK would not commit military forces to support the invasion or extract the men when the invasion failed and many men perished or were taken prisoner.
The screenplay does make reference to the disdain the military establishment had for Joe Kennedy (JFK's father and former ambassador to England). Joe Kennedy favored appeasing Hitler in the late 1930s and later was an unwitting participant in the Russian occupation of Europe. Plus, the military regime would have also known the truth behind the PT-109 legend where JFK botched up, lost his boat and several crew members.
Thirteen Days ignores the US (Kennedy's) culpability in the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US supported a military invasion of Cuba in March 1961. When this failed, several attempts were made on Castro's life. Castro and his Soviet allies had good reason to suspect the US was preparing to overthrow Castro, and therefore place weapons in Cuba. My Country's behavior was less than exemplary in the Kennedy - Johnson era. I believe a smattering of the dynamics of North American politics might help younger viewers understand the tension and policies of the era.
The film accurately shows the disdain that JFK and RFK harbored for Adlai Stevenson. Although, the film makers do not mention that JFK set up Adlai to lie to the United Nations about the bombing of Cuba preceding the Bay of Pigs. The Kennedy Administration was promulgating the lie the U.S. was not involved. Adlai was not given an accurate briefing until well after his presentation to the U.N. He was furious. There was animosity between the Kennedy's and Stevenson from that point onward until JFK's death.
What didn't work: I don't care for the black/white segments and the amount of time wasted on O'Donnell's family. Costner is a great actor, but accents are not in his forte'.
All in all, Thirteen Days is a great movie and well worth the price of admission. It reminded me of WHY we had the "Tuck and Duck" drills for Nuclear war in the '60s.
7/10
The Perfect Storm (2000)
A Ship of Fools sets Sail
(warning spoilers)
There are very few things I liked about this movie. I would have hit the eject button, but I kept waiting for it to get good. It didn't.
The special effects in this movie are realistic enough to cause sea sickness. There are few situations more fearsome as a major storm at sea. Which is the reason several hundred other vessels avoided the storm in the first place. Am I all alone in viewing the ill fated crew as greedy and stupid? The "Andrea Gail" was beyond the reach of the storm when the crew decided to sail into the storm in a malfunctioning fishing trawler. Not too bright.
I did not care for the story or the character development. Which left me feeling nothing when they all perished. Guess they never heard of Personal Flotation Devices.
This movie could have been improved by spending some of the budget on writers, rather than cast and special effects. The famous cast only had cliches and dull dialog. Or throw in a Sci-Fi twist and have U-96 surface and fire a couple torpedos into the "Andrea Gale". Almost anything would have improved this film.
The heroic efforts of the unsung heroes of the U.S. Coast Guard are portrayed. I'm just sorry the Coast Guard has to risk their lives to rescue the sail boat crew.
By the way, I do not intend any disrespect to the real life crew, as quite likely they were caught in the storm and did not choose to sail into harms way. We don't know what really happened to them, but this movie places them in an unflattering light.
Bullitt (1968)
Good Story - Great Car Chase!
Bullitt (McQueen) is a cop trying to protect an important witness from the mob and other bad guys. The basic story is worth watching, with enough plot twists to keep the movie interesting.
However, for those of us who remember the pony cars and MoPar Hemi's from the 60(s); the car chase with a realistic sound track make this movie. So many chase scenes in movies are filmed at 50 mph and then sped up to 120 mph, not so with Bullitt. The chase sequence shows some true high speed action, complete with smoking tires, high torque V-8 engines, musical exhaust tone and carburetor intake roar. The cars loose wheel covers (they were probably hub caps in 1968) and bottom out after small jumps. The chase is very realistic.
I understand Steve McQueen did a lot of the driving himself and I read that he kept the Mustang after completing the movie. If you enjoy car chases, check out this movie.
Galaxy Quest (1999)
Great Spoof of Star Trek, more accurately, Star Trek's cast
Galaxy Quest spoofs Star Trek, Trekkies, and aging stars who are type cast by their roles 20 of years past. It also poses the question: What if extraterrestrials viewed classic commercial television programs as factual?
Alan Rickman is terrific as the stuffy, shakesperian actor who ended up being type cast as Dr. Lazarus forever. Signourey Weaver plays the blonde space bimbo character, although I did not recognize her, even though I knew she was in the movie.
I wasn't a Tim Allen fan, but this movie sure made me one. Tim is great in his portrayal of the self-absorbed, ego-centric Captain Taggart. His character changes are amazing. He is a hero, a cynic, and a coward all within the confines of one film. To explain this would probably constitute a spoiler.
Robin Sachs is cast as Sarris, a somewhat funny and somewhat scary villain. Enrico Colantoni brings Mathesar to life.
This movie is witty, entertaining and has a few moments of drama. My kudos to the cast and writers. If you remember the original Star Trek, the Trek Conventions and all the rumors of angst among the actors; rent this movie.... You'll love it.
U-571 (2000)
Entertaining Sub Movie, But It's Not The History Channel
This movie is interesting, with great visual and sound effects and a terrific cast. The screenplay is fast paced with plenty of plot twists. It will keep you interested for the whole movie. I'm looking forward to seeing it again when it is on video.
The story is interesting, but it is not a historical documentary by any means. There are a few accurate points, such as American S Boats leaked like sieves. It also dramatically represents that submarines were not a pleasant place to be when attacked by the enemy.
I think the torpedo scenes were too much hyperbola and the depth charge scene was great, but the boat would have ended up in Davy Jone's locker with all those hits. It is very exciting and great drama, but probably not technically accurate.
I knew the history of the Enigma decoder before I went to see the movie. I read about it in school and I later saw it on the History Channel. So, I knew this movie wasn't factual. I didn't expect it to be.
Unfortunately, I overheard people walking out of the movie, making comments regarding "U-571" as a historical document. I heard the same type of comments after "Saving Private Ryan". Both were fictitious, but very entertaining. Well worth the price of admission.
My complaint with this movie is not with the writer/producer making entertaining fiction, but with the uninformed public who want to believe anything that Hollywood produces which resembles history must be accurate. Unfortunately, the real truth behind the history is often boring. I don't think too many people would pay the admission to see a story of Bletchley Park and Enigma. I'm thankful the British scientists broke the Enigma code, but I wouldn't pay to see the story dramatized.
The Hurricane (1999)
Interesting Story with Noteworthy Acting by Washington
This movie is based upon the saga of boxer Rubin Carter who was wrongfully accused and convicted in 1960's New Jersey.
Overall, the film is generally interesting, with a few dull moments. The story is well presented, but lacks continuity. Denzil Washington is very powerful in his role as Carter. I felt that he was Rubin Carter. Mr. Washington's performance alone makes this film worth watching.
I enjoyed Clancy Brown's performance as Lt. Williams, a prison guard who treated Rubin Carter with respect and dignity. The role was a sharp contrast to his portrayal of the vicious Byron Hadley in 'Shawshank Redemption' much to Brown's credit.
Rod Steiger is good as Judge Sorokin. Al Waxman is cast as the warden and provides depth to this character. You might not like the character, but the performance is great.
Cool Hand Luke (1967)
One of Paul Newman's best!
This movie has it all: Great cast, great screenplay and a talented director. It will make you laugh and it will make you think. The subject matter is 1930s prison life and inmates on the chain gang, a rather dark period in American History. However, the screenplay is entertaining and interesting. You end up liking, relating and admiring the inmates.
I saw this movie several times in the theater when it was in the first run theaters. It is that good. I bought the tape many years ago and have almost worn it out.
The story is unforgettable and I find myself quoting certain scenes from this movie. Most of my younger colleagues have not seen this movie, so they think I'm nuts when I quote the Strother Martin line "What we have here is a failure to communicate".
The Right Stuff (1983)
An entertaining and informative history of the Space Race
This movie is terrific! I loved it when I first saw it and I still enjoy it. The history presented in The Right Stuff is rather accurate by Hollywood standards, and almost every minute is entertaining. This movie should be viewed by students to give them some appreciation of the bravery, technology and political BS that had to be overcome to explore space.
The Mercury Astronauts are presented as "hot shots" and "dare-devils". This is probably accurate. Normal people don't sit on top of several tons of highly explosive propellant and get launched into space. {Thank Goodness} It took a special breed of men to risk it all and start the journey to the moon.
I enjoyed Sam Shepard's portrayal of Chuck Yeager. Yeager is one of the best and most capable pilots of all time. Breaking the sound barrier took skill and incredible bravery. Many men paid the ultimate price trying to break the sound barrier.
Fred Ward portrays a gritty Guss Grissom. Dennis Quaid also stands out as Scott Carpenter. However, Ed Harris plays John Glenn to perfection. Harris' character comes across as almost naive and honest to a fault. This seems to track with what I've read about John Glenn.
The Right Stuff and Apollo 13 are the best {historically based} space movies of all time.