erose001 Reviews

The Final Countdown (1980)

Holds Up Well

[8/10 · 7 August 2016]

In 1980, when this movie was released, we were at the very beginning of the DFX period, so sci-fi from the era does not always stand the test of time. Thanks to a minimum of FX and some really impressive stunt work and crafty flying, this movie does hold up well.

It's a beautiful day in Pearl Harbor as the U.S.S. Nimitz Carrier Group gets underway, only to find itself in the midst of a frightening, disorienting storm. Upon coming through to smooth waters again, the computer-assisted carrier with advanced satellite communications finds itself deaf and dumb, until a series of events clarifies that it has traveled back in time to Dec. 6, 1941.

The events that reveal the time travel are worth the price of admission alone. The age-old time paradoxes explored are pretty old hat to sci-fi time-travel buffs like me. And don't ask about the plausibility of the "portal," you just have to accept it. (FWIW, "Lost" used the same idea - with no more explanation than this movie - to equally fine effect.)

But it's a fun yarn, good to see Kirk Douglas still fit as a fiddle, and an enjoyable opportunity to revisit some of the great questions about the attack on Pearl Harbor: could it have been prevented? Were officials aware it was coming? Were there casualties beyond those specifically at Pearl? And so on.

I don't often recommend Hollywood remake movies (who needs to?), but this is a story that could easily benefit from the use of a modern carrier, updated casting, and CGI, all without requiring more than a cursory script update. But until they remake it, rest easy knowing you'll still have fun watching the original.

Best Time Ever with Neil Patrick Harris (2015)

Most Fun Ever!

[9/10 · 15 September 2015]

I haven't had so much fun watching a TV show in ages! NPH is fantastic as usual, as is all the talent appearing on the show. I was very impressed with the guest stars, and also with co-host Nicole Scherzinger. To think the show is genuinely live makes it all the more impressive.

Look for trivia-type games with great prizes, heartwarming hidden camera bits (which brought back childhood memories of Art Linkletter's House Party, but for the social media era), live involvement of the at-home audience in addition to the studio audience, musical numbers with a twist, and funny, good-natured stunts and pranks. (No meanness, thank goodness!) And that was just the type of segments in the first episode, which means there are probably many other types of segments to look forward to in future shows. If it maintains this tone and stays this fun, it will be must-see live TV for this usually cynical, time-shifting TV viewer.

I am not familiar with the UK show that inspired it, but I grew up in the golden era of variety TV, where vaudeville was brought into our homes by the likes of Ed Sullivan, Carol Burnett, and Sonny and Cher. Variety petered out because vaudeville lost its relevance. This is a fitting update for the 21st Century, and I hope everyone finds it as relevant as I do!

In a World... (2013)

Delightful look at being a woman in a Hollywood support business

[8/10 · 22 October 2014]

As I watched this story about the voice-over community, I remembered a saying about academia, "The competition and politics are so fierce because there is so little to fight over." For most of us, voice-overs are background noise, but they are a life for the people who do them. I love how well Lake Bell uses this disparity to tell the stories of several of the key players, their support systems, and their families. It's also laugh-out-loud funny because Bell and her talented cast have created interesting characters who can bring the comedy without being stereotypes. (Well, actually there are two stereotypes, but they are deliberate and Shakespearean, if one remembers who Shakespeare wrote his plays to amuse.) I recommend the movie not just because it creates an amusing glance into a different world, but also because it does have something serious to say about women in Hollywood. Kudos to a filmmaker who can teach a gentle lesson so pleasantly, with such fun and good humor.

The Hunter (IV) (2011)

The Tassie Tiger Makes a Fascinating Focal Point

[10/10 · 1 August 2014]

Using the idea of tracking the last Tassie Tiger to tell a larger tale could have failed badly, but in this case, it was handled with such subtlety, it lets the viewer tease out the story for him or herself, making it a far better movie. In some respects, it reminds me of *The Constant Gardener* in the sense of pitting human conspiratorial greed vs. nature and local populations. But it also tells an amazing story of human relationships by showing a parallel between the endangered/extinct animal and several different characters. (I urge you to keep an open mind about the symbolism, it is multi-layered.) It unfolds carefully, but builds suspense from the beginning. It lets the viewer ascertain the characters and their motivations for him or herself. The acting was pitch perfect all around, the cinematography was beautiful, and the score was perfect. If you keep your expectations reasonable (e.g., don't expect an action-heavy movie), you will be impressed by a real thriller that will leave you breathless with the climax and with a lump in your throat at the denouement.

Getaway (I) (2013)

I generally enjoy some good car chases...

[3/10 · 27 July 2014]

...But they weren't in this movie. There were maybe two brief sequences with some interesting cinematography, and the concept of making the sidekick a smartass young woman were the only things I liked. I'll give it five stars for that. For the rest: boring chase sequences, uninspired cinematography, inane dialogue, unrealistic motivations, tired story idea (woman in distress AGAIN), etc., it gets one star for an average of three total. All that said, I must admit to being pleasantly surprised at how well Selena Gomez held up her part. She did keep me watching in spite of being pretty bored by the whole thing. Now I want to see if she can do well in a better movie.

Gravity (2013)

Because the de rigueur position of IMDb reviewers is to hate Gravity...

[10/10 · 12 July 2014]

...I'm going to swim against the tide. Not only do I find the film an incredible technical achievement, but the symbolism and allegory built into what is essentially a simple story about survival is so intense, I've watched the film unapologetically five times, and I doubt I'm finished. For those watching just for the surface story, you'll be disappointed in the lack of scary aliens and other adrenaline fixes. (And you'll probably nitpick every minor technical goof.) That's your prerogative. But if you want to feel like you're experiencing a film that is not just about space, but about life at it's most primal, watching Gravity will be as profound for you as it has been for me.

Black Box (2014)

Loved the Pilot

[10/10 · 24 April 2014]

Which may bode well for the show. (Pilots can stink and turn into good shows, but it's rare. But good pilots often turn into good shows, so fingers crossed. I have seen a recent exception to that rule, so I hope this isn't like that.) My one criticism is that I hope they focus a bit more on cases. I understand we need Catherine's back-story to set us off, but I think the combination of unique cases with her own struggle will be most compelling. If it worked for a brilliant, limping, psychotic, addicted, wreck of a male doctor, then why not for a brilliant, frightening but compelling, bipolar woman doctor? Oliver Sacks, House and Carrie Matheson introduced us, now let us see where Catherine Black takes us.

Primeval: New World (2012–2013)

Likable characters, boring stories

[5/10 · 26 July 2013]

The original UK *Primeval* remains to this day one of my favorite guilty pleasures. And while some of the characters in that version left me a bit cold, and I found the ups and downs caused by poor network treatment frustrating, I never tired of the dry humor or complicated and mixed character motivations as they battled anomalies, creatures, and humans determined to use both to achieve greater power. The situations created suspense: You were always wondering how they were going to get out of this week's predicament. In this version, the motives are straightforward, all goodness all the time: Save the modern world from time anomalies and creatures that arrive through them. These creatures often predate humans, and, being out of place, generally cause trouble, including approaching humans an interesting new prey species. The problem I have is that we have not yet (as of July 2013 on the SyFy run of the first season) been given a clear reason as to why these particular characters are doing this; there is very little to motivate them to do this work, and the context does not make the need for them doing it particularly critical nor gripping. There's no scientific researcher like Cutter, driven by pure scientific curiosity about the phenomenon, just a entrepreneur who lost a loved one to an anomaly creature and who finds the experience an adrenaline rush. We have no sense of what he hopes to achieve long-term. There are no hard-core nerds like Connor, no animal lovers like Abby, and apparently no interest in obtaining the tech that enabled the UK team to put anomalies in a holding pattern to prevent more wayward creatures from getting lost in the wrong time (while of course dealing with those that had slipped through before they could be stopped). (Which means there is always at least one character left "guarding" the anomaly. Boring....) And when this team discusses tech, it's in the context of the tech expert providing a nice app for their phone as a done deal, whereas the process of creating tech in the original was suspenseful: Will it work, will it help, how much does it need to be tweaked, etc. Sometimes tech failures contributed to the action.

So every week we're introduced to a new creature that must be returned to its time, and we watch the characters do relatively boring things to figure out how to accomplish this. Civilians are tangentially involved, but with the exception of one episode, rarely do we see their involvement in any depth. (And that episode's civilian was not depicted in a manner that even made us worry about her or collateral damage in general, as we always did in the original, which even included a character who had grown to adulthood by traveling through alternate times after being drawn into an anomaly as a child.) Meanwhile, as the creatures are being tracked, the characters tell us their life stories, which gets very old very quickly. (Seriously, why would we be interested, beyond the basic reason they're involved in the first place? Backstories are for storyboards to guide the actions of a character in the current situation, but it's the current situation where the focus for the audience exists.) For example, in an episode that should've ratcheted the suspense to the rafters, main characters being stalked by raptors similar to the velociraptors of Jurassic Park, we're being bored to death listening to one character talk to two others about their feelings about the death of loved ones. The ultimate capture was so anti-climatic, it was hard to believe they were in any danger to begin with. And there is no "big bad" here, either, a character with a hidden agenda, wanting to use the phenomenon to achieve bigger goals, like the original's Helen Cutter and her first quest to start a prehistoric zoo, and then ultimately end humanity because humanity was destroying the planet. (Granted, her character was a bit of a mess, but at least she kept things interesting, and kept viewers guessing.) While the butterfly effect is alluded to, no one seems particularly interested in either changing history, nor showing concern that others might want to.

Ultimately, even if they want to limit this version to a weekly creature feature, they need to up the action, reduce the chit-chat, and make the process of capturing the creatures suspenseful. If they really want to make this sci-fi in the tradition that the original followed, they need far more depth to the characters and the stories. The UK *Primeval* was not a perfect show by any means, but by comparison to this show, it was imaginative and action-packed. It's as if these showrunners have found a formula and are sticking to it, even if it is boring as hell.

There is potential here. The actors are good, and the characters have the potential to be interesting. Now they need to add more imagination, suspense, and action. i.e., they should ask themselves the question that it was clear the original's creators asked, what would I do if I were in this situation? It is, after all the question that every good sci-fi story wants its audience to ask.

Ted (2012)

I Would've Given it 10 Stars, but...

[8/10 · 13 July 2013]

...Seth McFarlane cannot get over the idea that ridiculing racism, sexism, and homophobia can be accomplished by doing some kind of "meta" mumbo jumbo that lets you still make jokes at the expense of those who are non-white, non-Christian, non-heterosexual, and non-male. And it's too bad, because this is a very funny movie. But unless you are a white heterosexual male of a certain age, you might struggle to get past the offensive stuff and miss an otherwise very funny, moving story, with great acting and directing, and superb comic timing. Considering how well this movie did at the box office, I can only assume that if McFarlane stopped the extreme offensive stuff, his future movies would do even better, because he'd have an audience that includes people that are not just white men raised in the 80s. Every time the offensive stuff popped up in "Ted," it was superfluous, and actually stopped the momentum of the story. (A flat, unfunny bit involving the Patrick Warburton character comes to mind, and the payoff later in the movie was not worth it. A cameo character involved in the bit was momentarily funny, but there are so many other ways to achieve the level of humor he was aiming for without stopping the momentum of his story and offending a significant proportion of the American public in one fell swoop.) It's clear he can be hysterically funny without the offensive material, so why interrupt a great, funny story with stuff that alienates up to half of his potential viewers? And make no mistake, the offensive jokes are as superfluous as the related humor is necessary to the story. The jokes that are specific to the story work without fail and are great. (Including one that was the most extreme scatological bit I've ever seen, but I still found hysterical.) The offensive jokes do not work and are just not worth it. The best humor takes aim at those with the wherewithal to handle it, not those who are already marginalized. I've read McFarlane making the excuse is that he's poking fun at a society that allows these issues to marginalize people. Given that the story is about maturity coming when one learns to take responsibility for one's own behavior, his excuse comes across as lazy, immature and extremely ironic. I challenge Seth McFarlane to make a movie that does not require his fans to defend him, but can appeal to everyone. Take a lesson from Chris Rock, who knows how to engage in topical humor without cutting down those who are already victimized by society. And learn to write jokes without using the word "rape."

Continental Divide (1981)

One of the most underrated movies of the 80s

[8/10 · 7 June 2013]

I loved this movie when it first came out, and after catching it again recently, I was reminded of why I liked it so much. John Belushi is so good and so funny, it reminds me again of how sad it was to lose this comedy gem. And it's always great to see Blair Brown, one of our best actresses ever. Seeing her in her prime again is delightful. I was also impressed at how well it holds up over time. It's a shame it was critically panned and did poorly at the BO when it came out, b/c in a decade full of strange movies, this is a standout, and now, IMHO, a classic. And the best part? Being reminded that the Bald Eagle population in the early 80s was only 2,000 in North America, and now it's in the six figures. The mountain lion scene is a little far-fetched, but, goodness, that is a gorgeous cat.

Mr Selfridge (2013–2016)

Did Doctor Who transport Ari Gold back in time?

[6/10 · 18 April 2013]

This series disappointed me terribly. I watched the first two episodes and had to stop there. It just put me in a foul mood. I felt as if some TV executives sat around a table and debated how best to revisit the Edwardian era that was handled with such panache in Downton Abbey and settled on this misbegotten story. The real Harry Selfridge was a very troubled man (many think he was actually bipolar) who had a creative, flamboyant side that he showed the public. (Although he was NOT PT Barnum, as these showrunners seem to think, he still abided by most of the propriety of Edwardian London.) But this Harry is Jeremy Piven playing a toned-down Ari Gold transported back in time (anachronistic colloquialisms and all), and not even as well as he played Ari Gold. (I'm not sure if its writing, directing, or acting, but I'm guessing its a combination). All the principal characters are bland and lack motivation (although Frances O'Connor and Zoe Tapper stand above the fray somewhat), the writing is really uneven, and the photography is even more uneven. Several of the supporting characters do stand out, giving the "downstairs" group (the shopgirls and waiters, for example) stories that a bit more interesting, but even that is not nearly as fulsome as Downton. I will give the production arts team a tip of the hat, as the sets and costumes are top notch and would be even more gorgeous if they were photographed more effectively. I do agree with other reviewers that all the leading women look too similar. Granted, that was a look that women sought at the time (the Gibson Girl), but this takes place in London, where you do find many blondes and gingers as well as brunettes. All in all, considering the tragedies of the real Harry Selfridge, I just can't see how they plan to get from here to there under the current cumbersome and poorly done arrangement. They'd have been better off doing a story about the Wanamaker family or Marshall Fields (where the real Harry got his start), and let the UK and US enjoy a period piece about the Roaring 90s and real creation of the modern department store, rather than doing upstairs, downstairs in a London department store.

Silent House (2011)

First Half Interesting, Elizabeth Olsen VG Again

[6/10 · 11 August 2012]

I watched this strictly on the strength of Elizabeth Olsen's amazing performance in *Martha Marcy May Marlene*, but after reading up on the intentional use of the film making technique (the long shot or single shot) and the source material (the Urugayan film *La casa muda*), I was intrigued that the filmmakers, Chris Kentis and Laura Lau, were also the filmmakers of *Open Water* (2003), a film I found extremely suspenseful. This film is not up to the standards of the prior work, IMO, but it did have moments that felt pretty terrifying. Olsen gives another fine performance, inhabiting the character so much I didn't even think about her prior work after the first five minutes. Choosing her for the lead was wise, she kept me involved all the way through, even when the ending devolved into what I felt was a more contrived "resolution." I would warn horror fans, this isn't strictly horror, in spite of its trailers, it's more psychological thriller. I will give the filmmakers props for dealing with the psychology effectively (it's an area with which I'm familiar), but horror fans and "found footage" fans might be somewhat put off as the protagonist begins to realize what she's dealing with. I do hope Olsen will branch out beyond the "young woman in peril" films she's done so far, I think she has excellent potential. As for the film, if you like films with interesting technical challenges used in the psychological thriller genre, you may enjoy this. Or you may enjoy Olsen's performance. It is not, however, going to be a film that everyone will embrace.

Person of Interest: Super (2012) Season 1, Episode 11

Gets better with each episode

[10/10 · 12 January 2012]

It took me several episodes to start really engaging with this show, and I credit the performances of the cast to keep me coming back. But this episode was the whole package, and I feel like my patience has been supremely rewarded. As a huge fan of Hitchcock, I love how the writers wove an homage to *Rear Window* into the weekly POI process (amusingly), even while including a meaty flashback and two additional story lines that progress the larger narrative and mysteries without weighing the viewers down. And there was a lot to absorb in this ep. (I was shaking my head after thinking about all that was covered.) In the past when they've tried to build on the back-story, it seemed cumbersome, but ever since about ep. 8, it feels like they're finally finding a balance that works. And the bigger mysteries are not sacrificed in the process. POI has found its feet and it's become MSTV. (Must-see TV.)

Primeval (2007–2011)

Delightfully Cheesy

[7/10 · 7 March 2011]

No question: This is junk-food TV, but it perfect for "Supernatural Saturdays" here in the U.S. on BBCA. I enjoyed the first incarnation, was disappointed at the cancellation, and delighted that it was "brought back from extinction" in 2011. I do miss the original villains (I still can't see Alexander Siddig (DS9) as a villain, and the "lost boy" Ethan was unbelievable as a villain), and I miss the old Connor-Abby tension with their mutual love of a certain little creature (who has been relegated to "safety storage" rather than living with Abby) continuing to keep them attracted to each other. The ensemble could use a little work, I would like to see Connor and Abby click better, but Lucy Brown's return in a guest appearance improved the dynamic markedly (especially with the Connor and Abby characters), reminding me of the best ensemble aspects of the former series. It also indicates that the characters are relatively well-drawn individually, they just need to click better as a group, and would benefit from more visits by Lucy Brown. For part two of 2011 series, if they work on the ensemble, and ratchet up the tension with better villainy, I'll improve my rating. As for the action and the creatures, though, they have that in the bag, and it's great fun. 7.5 out of 10, based on this being a "B" type program.

Zombieland (2009)

A new comedy touchstone

[10/10 · 8 August 2010]

While *Zombieland* will not go down as a great cultural philosophical film (although if you think about it, there's a little bit of that), it gets a 10 from me as the most hysterical comedy-black comedy I've seen in years. The premise we start with involving "Columbus" (Jesse Eisenberg, an amazing young talent) is used to great comic effect consistently throughout, the double entendrè and profanity are pitch perfect, adding to the comedy, rather than being there superfluously for shock value or to be "cool." The pop culture references are hilarious, and hit all the right notes for the actors in the film as well as their characters (you'll see what I mean), the core ensemble works together like a dream (including the perfectly executed meet-ups which are both funny and surprising), the references to the human condition are spot on, but brief, and do not stop the momentum. No maudlin or preachy here. Bill Murray makes the perfect call back to the ensemble comedies he was so successful at participating in in the 80s that carry the same kind of comic momentum is a different kind of comic world. But this is not his film, and his grace at being the (hysterical) cameo is notable (but not surprising). Everything about his presence in the film is ironic, but the film itself is a mixture of all the elements of black comedy, irony, satire, parody, etc, with an appropriate amount of clearly fake gore, screwball moments, and a new twist on scatological humor. And I see several reviewers have mentioned a particularly funny scene as well, and I'm guessing it's the same one that had me ROTFLMAO, involving a couple of simultaneous situation reversals that are ingenious to say the least (I say no more for fear of spoiling). It's been a long time since a movie has done that for me, and any minor imperfections (a slight lag in the momentum briefly in the middle, for example) are made up for by the overall hilarity, and a solid ensemble, Jesse Eisenberg and Woody Harrelson being perfect, Abigail Breslin showing that she's growing up nicely as an actress, and Emma Stone a strong young actress (and comic straight-woman) to watch. If the aforementioned 80s comedies were the comedy touchstone of my generation, *Zombieland* will I expect become the touchstone of today's generation, and rightfully so. And, P.S., the music is fantastic.

The Good Guys (2010)

Excellent Potential

[8/10 · 23 May 2010]

Based on this program's pilot episode, I will plan to keep tuning in to see if an already strong ensemble continues to gel and the convoluted comic antics continue to make me laugh out loud. *Burn Notice* creator Matt Nix and company have managed to pull off the parody of the buddy cop show without making the characters seem idiotic or the crimes they find themselves in the middle of seem irrelevant. Good plotting, good narrative, good characters. It's the Burn Notice formula (with a less driven Michael-like character, an even funnier Sam stand-in, and a Fiona-like foil in the guise of the boss) applied to the Dallas Police Department (which is, in itself, a nice change of locale and a potential mine of comic gold). This has the potential to be one of the great buddy cop movies (48 HRS, Beverly Hills Cop, Lethal Weapon, etc.) transferred to the small screen and made to fit just right. It is a pilot, so it's potential could either fizzle or be fulfilled, but as a stand-alone program, I feel it deserves 8/10, which means it's an excellent pilot. Once the series hits the streets, I'll adjust my rating upward or downward accordingly.

The Time Traveler's Wife (2009)

Lacks the emotional and scientific wallop of the novel

[6/10 · 10 February 2010]

As a stand-alone creature, *The Time Traveler's Wife* is a nice love story about a nice couple struggling with an unusual difficulty. The actors do a fine job with the material they were given, but unfortunately, what they were given was a pale shadow of the original tale. The original tale was fleshed out with much stronger plot points, subtexts and symbolism, with supporting characters who had a real role to play in the progression of the plot. Several of these have been jettisoned completely, others are there for reasons that really make no sense other than to be "couple friends." (For example, the character crucial to the ending in the book is only alluded to and not in the context of the ending.) The whole reason for the ending was completely glossed over (to say more gives away an important novel plot point), the intensity of the struggles the couple faces are barely evident, and their motivations (driven by some of those very same supporting characters) are unclear. Obviously one can only fit so much of such a dense work into a two-hour feature, but there are other ways this could be done without making the story a superficial shadow of its former self. Hour-long TV dramas do a better job of providing this kind of writing, characterization, and directing (even those that are not serialized). Furthermore, while the novel gives us a range of characters with whom to identify in a very complex and surreal conceit, the movie only gives us the central two characters, which means if you don't identify with them, you're not going to enjoy the movie. On the other hand, if you do, and if you haven't read the novel, you may enjoy the story as a superficial love story with a clichéd ending. Novel lovers, beware, a key scene, the one that ties everything together at the end of the story, is completely missing, and that was, to me, the greatest loss, as it actually went to the heart of the love story itself.

Eight Below (2006)

A cautionary tale with wonderful dogs

[6/10 · 3 December 2006]

I hate to be the party-pooper, but if you're a dog lover, this movie wrenches you to the core. Possibly because the dogs *were* so good in the movie, you really bond with them. If you must watch, be sure to cuddle close to your own dogs and remind yourself that it's just a movie.

That said, this is "inspired by true events" and should, therefore, be a cautionary tale of how sled dogs are handled in storm conditions. Even with the understanding that sled dogs are handled differently than house pets, there is still no excuse for no contingency plan. Just like the tens of thousands of pets and livestock lost during Katrina, when weather is extreme, exacuations of both humans and non-humans must be planned. The money spent in the efforts to save the dogs is evidence enough of how important this is. And these are valuable dogs, so when they are lost, as was feared throughout the movie, that's a sizable emotional AND financial investment.

I was also disgusted with the filmmakers during one scene that was gorgeous and very sweet that ended abruptly and unpleasantly. (I won't say more because I don't like spoilers.) That scene alone spoiled the movie for me, because it's not like the viewer isn't already aware of how much these dogs are going through. There was also one unrealistic scene with the dogs, who otherwise performed like champions. (And that I'm sure was the fault of the filmmakers, expecting dogs to do things dogs don't do.)

Cinematography was beautiful. Cast and writing were Disney-typical, the crusty scientist (Bruce Greenwood) who's a pain in the butt but turns out to have a heart of gold, the young love interest (Moon Bloodgood, who is worth watching in the future), and, of course, the dog's one caretaker and champion, Paul Walker, as the camp guide and dog handler. Walker does give the viewer a sense of the horror his character must've suffered leaving the dogs behind (through no fault of his own, in fact over his strenuous objections), so he gets points for that. Jason Biggs provides some good comic relief, otherwise the performances were adequate. Like any Disney film with animals, the humans rarely outperform the other animals, and the dogs do steal this one.

I've warned the dog lovers in my family, and now I've warned you. If you do watch, make a donation to a humane society and write your legislators about the importance of evacuation plans in extreme weather for both humans and non-humans.

One last note: I've noticed several commenters took small children to see this movie. DO NOT take small children to this movie unless you know animal issues and can explain them to a child. I knew my children would fall to pieces, so I'm glad I screened the movie before taking them. If they want to see it as adults, I hope being raised animal lovers, they'll recognize the deeper message: Human are not better or worthier than our animal companions, whether they work for us at an actual job, or just help us out at home. We need to stop treating them like there inanimate property without feelings or emotions. And add in the intelligence and loyalty of our canine friends, and it's the least we can do. We domesticated them, we owe it to them.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

Watch this with Black Hawk Down...

[9/10 · 27 May 2006]

...to see both the horrors of war and the evolution of warfare.

But more affecting is the individual and group interactions of the ensemble in SPR - spoken and unspoken - and Spielberg's direction, which made war real, in its terror, ambiguousness, and heroism.

Tom Hanks as Cap. Miller is the commanding officer you dream of, warts and all, and his command comes together around him loyally, even in FUBAR situations, in a group of outstanding and heartbreaking performances.

The final scenes are among the most suspenseful in war film-making. I still get chills, and feel fear as if I was on the front lines myself.

If you're a vet, watch with caution, there are triggers. If you are not a vet, then make a point to watch these two movies so you can know what our vets and soldiers endure in war.

Dealing Dogs (2006 TV Movie)

Humans can be capable of both pure goodness and pure evil

[9/10 · 11 April 2006]

And you won't see anything much more evil than what was documented in this film. Whenever I encounter our capacity for evil against creation, it horrifies me, but sometimes out of that evil you see some grace. In this case, it was the unimaginable hard work of a young man called "Pete," who went undercover to expose the practices of a Class B Dog Dealer. How he did what he did - being an animal lover in a hell on earth - is a mystery of grace to me, and an example of one of those rare times when the ends really do justify the means. And the work of "Pete" and the other filmmakers is among the best documentary work I have seen.

Be warned: This film is not for the faint of heart. The filmmakers do try to break up the hard stuff with more informative bits, but there is hard stuff, and some of it sneaks up on you unexpectedly. (One scene will be burned in my memory forever.) Nevertheless, it ranks right up there with HBO's excellent but difficult series on the global AIDs crisis. If you really, really love animals, you need to watch this film - and sit through all of it - because we all have to understand the practices of Class B Dog Dealers.

As an animal activist, I've followed the work of groups such as *Last Chance for Animals*, for whom "Pete" worked, and it is thanks to them that more animal lovers and pet owners are starting to understand the dangers of these dealers and the fact that their beloved pet and family member can be kidnapped right out of their neighborhood - right out of their yard - as described for us in detail by a seller in the film. To watch loving creatures, so many of whom are clearly family pets, housed in the conditions "Pete" documented is beyond comprehension, except you know that this is the purgatory before the hell they endure when they are shipped off to labs.

There is a payoff, but it makes this no less a cautionary tale. The film doesn't stop the practice across the country, nor does it stop the labs that seem to think that they must have beagles for their research. (Yes, that's right, "Snoopy" is often the research dog of choice.) But you'll come away knowing that justice can occur in bits and pieces and you will be much more educated on the issue. Best of all, you will have enormous respect for people like "Pete" and the other animal activists you meet in the film. It's an important counterweight to the propaganda we hear from corporations that activists are violent troublemakers.

The only violence in this film occurred in a Class B dog warehouse perpetrated by humans housing dogs in horrible inhumane conditions.

Shadowlands (1993)

A Classic Romance

[9/10 · 11 June 2005]

For those of us brought up on great classic romances, movies like *Dark Victory* and *Now, Voyager* (Okay, I have a soft spot for Bette Davis movies), this is our kind of movie.

Richard Attenborough has brought a true melodrama to life in the same year in which he acted in Stephen Spielberg's *Jurassic Park*. (The young Joseph Mazzello appears in both films as well.) This is about the love affair and marriage of Joy Gresham (American poet) and C.S. Lewis (Professor, writer, and probably best known for his children's "Narnia" series of books). He manages to do it memorably and without manipulation. He lets the characters tell the story and reach out the viewer through the story, making you feel as if you are a fly on their wall.

Anthony Hopkins is superb as "Jack" Lewis, life-long bachelor, more set in his ways than he cares to admit, and Mr. Hopkins, who acts so much with his eyes, makes us believe that he really IS Jack. Debra Winger brings just the kind of vibrancy to the life of "this old bachelor" that gives the film life too. In light of the story arc, one might wonder if Ms. Winger has been typecast, but if so, only because she sharpens the soft tones of the location, plays a character that brings new life to the Lewis brothers, and makes one believe that if the real Joy was as Ms. Winger plays her, then her name was apt.

And watch for a scene near the end of the film between Mr. Hopkins and young Joseph Mazzello as Douglas. Through most of the film, his innocence is juxtaposed against world-weariness of his mother and Mr. Lewis, but the viewer can see throughout a connection that is finally made in this scene between the characters. Edward Hardwicke as brother and fellow life-long bachelor "Warnie" is a delight, especially in his scenes with Douglas, with whom he develops an especially endearing relationship.

Maybe it's because I enjoy the classic romances so much that I enjoy this film, but I've had male friends enjoy the film as well, set as it is in 1950s Oxford, which was, at the time, a all-male institution, with the typical male banter and pub-crawling.

The only reason I don't give this film 10 stars is that the momentum of the movie is lost in a couple of places, where a subplot appears that does not at first seem connected to the story. But it is to the credit of all involved that the momentum is regained each time.

Friday Night Lights (2004)

Peter Berg is on His Way

[9/10 · 13 March 2005]

For those viewers who know football, and especially Texas HS Football, I can imagine they will find nits and picks throughout, but for a modest football fan like myself, this movie was both entertaining and educational.

Possible Spoiler: This movie takes us inside the much-storied Texas HS football, and some of the football players of a top West Texas football school during one season in 1988. The reliance of Odessa on football is both breathtaking and sad in its necessity to the local economy, to the point that the coach is operating under a hammer constantly.

Considering the focus on the game, the characters are well-drawn and played. There were a few gaps, but nothing that detracted from the story for me. Derek Luke is a standout, as is, to my delight and surprise, Tim McGraw. But the performances Berg gets from all the young men playing the players is pretty terrific. And Billy Bob Thornton does the coach just right, understated tension throughout, just as you would imagine for this character, and yet his love of the game and the boys still shines through. Never preachy or over the top.

Editing is a bit choppy in spots, and emphasis on some games over others can be confusing, but this was minor to me. Also check out the soundtrack, it matches the story so beautifully and so surprisingly, really setting a perfect mood. The primary artist used was a Texas band called "Explosions in the Sky." (In addition, some of the top rap artists of 1988 appear in the soundtrack.) Peter Berg has been a director to watch, IMO, and this movie shows me he's really on his way.

Ordinary People (1980)

One of the finest - if not the finest - movies of the 1980s

[10/10 · 8 January 2005]

An amazing movie from the first year of the decade, by a director in an unparalleled directing debut. I've always enjoyed Robert Redford more as a director than an actor, and when this movie came out, I remembered being very dubious about seeing it. (Word of mouth at the time was pretty amazing, though, and that's what prompted me to get over it.) But once seen (and re-seen several times), I have made a point of catching all of Redford's directorial efforts and I'm rarely disappointed.

I won't rehash the plot, others have done a good job of that, but I will say that this is much more a character study of a family than it is plot-driven. So many character studies are somewhat contrived ("Rosebud" anyone?*), but this felt so *real*, real family dynamics, real behaviors, real reactions and interactions. And the simplest subtlest scenes tell most of the story. For example, pay attention to a scene early in the movie between the son, Conrad, and his mother in the upstairs hallway. The attention to detail is stunning, and yet barely noticeable unless you're looking for it. All you know is that you have suddenly grasped a whole new level of understanding about these characters. Mary Tyler Moore is, if you'll forgive the cliché, a revelation. Especially for those of us who grew up with her sitcoms.

That said, as the plot does unwind through the experiences of each family member, it does ultimately pack a pretty hefty emotional wallop, as in the kind you thought you should have seen coming, and didn't. It still gets me every time.

This movie doesn't get nearly the attention as a "classic" that it deserves. See it and I'd guarantee you'd help change that.

* And for you Welles fans out there, no offense, I do appreciate that Citizen Kane represented a whole new way to make a movie and respect Orson Welles' presence in the canon of breakthrough/visionary movie makers.

The Missing (I) (2003)

A peek into the Medicine World

[28 August 2004]

After reading the mixed reviews on this movie, I waited to see it, and I'm sorry I did. It is hard for Caucasians of the "developed" world to understand, much less create in film, the beliefs of traditional peoples, such as the First Nations of North America (portrayed in this movie by the Chiricahua Apache people).

The growing movement of American Indian filmmakers will no doubt change this (in addition to filmmakers from traditional cultures all over the world), but in the meantime, Ron Howard has done a journeyman's job on this movie. (That's a good thing.) For me, it ranks with Michael Apted's *Thunderheart* in portraying the way traditional peoples see family, spirituality, and good and evil. This movie also allows the Caucasian characters of this story to be taught and enriched by these traditions.

Viewers who expect to either see sentimentality such as that in *Dances With Wolves* or a western in the shoot-em-up style will be disappointed. (And just for the record, I'm a sucker for DWW, even though I see its shortcomings, and I also like a well-made western.) But for those who want a glimpse into the Medicine World of traditional peoples, this is likely to be good viewing experience. (And for those who do not understand what I mean by Medicine World, I recommend reading some good American Indian literature, starting with *Black Elk Speaks*.)

For other movies about traditional peoples, I recommend Phillip Noyce's *Rabbit-Proof Fence* about the "stolen generations" of aboriginal children in early 20th century Australia, and any film made by Sherman Alexie or Chris Eyre (for example, *Smoke Signals*, an excellent movie these two American Indian men collaborated to create).

It's hard to put the experience of interacting with the medicine world on film, but Ron Howard now ranks as one of the few directors who has.

The 4400 (2004–2007)

Okay, I'm biased, but....

[16 July 2004]

Unlike some of the others here, I found this to be a pretty good sci-fi TV movie, and I'm looking forward to future installments. Of course, I don't set high expectations for TV movies, so there's lots of room to please me.

Ira Steven Behr and René Echevarria have pretty strong pedigrees with their work on Star Trek (TNG and DS9) and you can see the influence here: Sci-fi with some moral ambiguity without being hamhanded.

Those who don't like the Star Trek franchise may not find this as enjoyable as I do. And anyone who is looking for creepy crawlies or little gray people will be disappointed. It's clear that while the paranormal plays a key role in the lives of the characters (not to mention the key mystery of where they went, why they're back now and in this particular number, and largely staying close to Seattle, with only a few returning to their original homes), it's the characters and their relationships with others that take center stage. Especially when those left behind went on with their lives, leaving the 4400 to try to pick up pieces of lives that, to them, were firmly established "just yesterday" before losing the time. To find a place in this new world is bound to be very frightening.

Those who have compared this to the non-mythological X-Files eppys (always my favorites) have made, IMO, an apt comparison. Which is ironic, considering the role abduction played in the "Mulder myth" story lines. Now let's hope they don't dodge off into Klingon-type mythology in future eppys.

(My apologies to other Trekkers, but, aside from Worf, I can only take so much Klingon.)

Overall, 6/10. For a TV movie, I'll add a couple of points, 8/10.