maeander Reviews

Play Misty for Me (1971)

OK stalker movie.

[6/10 · 14 July 2022]

This was one of the first celebrity stalker films. It is also Clints Eastwood's first time as a director.

Jessica Walter (from Arrested Development) is not only incredibly beautiful but also incredibly scary.

The only thing I didn't understand was Clint Eastwood wearing a pair of briefs. Cool Clint should wear boxers...not saggy briefs.

Century City (2004)

I just rewatched it 18 years after the original broadcast.

[6/10 · 28 April 2022]

Predicting the near future is very difficult. Watching the prediction 18 years later can be painful. This sci-fi legal drama takes place in 2030. I just rewatched the pilot in 2022 and none of the predictions came true.

The story concerns two cases. The first has to do with human cloning. The second with extreme youth regeneration in the elderly. Neither has happened.

Another problem is the advanced technology shown. They did not get that right either. Yes, they have holograms....but there is no internet or smart phones.

The acting is solid. Production values are pretty good. The true prediction of the future is none existent.

At best it's an oddity. It's a curiosity that is worth a look but only as a curiosity.

Family Plot (1976)

My favorite Hitchcock from the '60s & '70s

[8/10 · 17 April 2022]

Family Plot is not really suspense or comedy. It is , however, the best ironic movie (outside of "The Trouble With Harry) that he made. It's the story of 2 couples...1 bad and the other...not so bad. Three of the leads are great, but it is Barbara Harris who steals this film.

Hitchcock lets her show her talents and she steals the picture. He also allow her to do one thing that no other actor has ever done in a Hitchcock movie. At the very end, she breaks the fourth wall.

The master was best in the 1940s and 1950s. Of his latter films, this one shines. Sound isn't great and the photography can be flat at times. Still, it's one of my favorite.

Marnie (1964)

Marnie is a disgusting movie.

[2/10 · 16 April 2022]

Tippi Hedren rejected Hitchcock's advances in "The Birds". This was his revenge. He wanted to debase her. So her raped her on camera using Sean Connery. Because it was the early 1960's; the rape was in the confines of a traditional marriage. Middle class America could not see it as rape...after all, rape in marriage did not exist for them.

But it was rape, pure and simple. It was revenge on Hedron. Sir Alfred new how to make a movie. The very artificial matte paintings used could be called stylized. I consider them a nasty cheap little way for him to make a crappy little movie to get revenge on an actress who rejected him physically. This film is exploitation the the worse degree.

I really dislike this completely.disgusting revenge a talented director created because he had power over an actress who did want to sleep with him.

The Good Guy (2009)

Wall Street doesn't work that way.

[3/10 · 9 February 2022]

Screenwriters of a certain age think a stockbroker can make a cold call to a rich/poor person on the phone and they will sell them massive amounts of stock by pressuring them to buy now. That really doesn't happen.

It is true that this is only a muguffin to set up the three way romance. Still, the premise is so silly...They might as well be scientist trying to cure hiccups or philosophers fighting over the meaning of existence...or farmers growing the perfect ear of corn.

The basic premise is silly. That undermines the entire film. Nothing new happens in this very pedestrian film. A complete disappointment. The basic story has been done so many times before...and done so much better.

The Beast of Hollow Mountain (1956)

Low Budget. Not the best.

[5/10 · 23 December 2021]

King Kong was more alive than this beast. Gumby was more alive than this beast. This kind of movie lives and dies by the F/X. I have seen hand puppets more alive than this beast. It's interesting to watch, but you won't buy one minute of it. It's a curiosity. It's just not very good.

The Stand (2020–2021)

It needs to be re-cut.

[4/10 · 22 November 2021]

The flashbacks and flash forwards do not work. The story loses all of its tension because we know in advance if a character lives or dies.

They play around with the ages, sex, etc of who the characters are in the original novel. That's okay...not great, but okay. For some reason, scriptwriters fell they have to do this to make their story their own. That's crap, but if they feel they need to do that (to make it more modern), I can live with that.

Improve it now. Do what they did with Godfather 1 & 2, issue a version that is linear. You'll have a much better story and a better mini-series. Sometimes going basic ( i.e. Straight story time ) is the best (dramatically) way to go.

The Devil's Rain (1975)

Satan takes the stage.

[7/10 · 30 October 2021]

The most amazing thing about this movie is the cast. At this time the stars were no longer A list. Yes, they were slumming. But they are top notch actors doing a great job.

The script is okay. For 1975, the special effects for a B picture are all right. The pacing is fine...until the end. The ending is so slow. I think they fell in love with the melting effects. But after awhile, 50 people melting becomes less than 1 person melting. But the worst is "Oh! The good guys won!...no they didn't!".

Forget setting up for a sequel. By the way, there weren't any. Take the logical ending and just let it end.

I liked the cast. Most of the script was okay. A nice way to spend a rainy afternoon.

Battle Beyond the Stars (1980)

Star Wars meets The Magnificent Seven...

[3/10 · 18 July 2021]

... and they both lose.

The biggest problem I have with this movie is how unoriginal it is. The script is such a ripoff and so silly; that it works against the "serious" performances. Really, Kelvin and Gelt? Is this supposed to make me laugh? It's lazy. It's not funny. It's not exciting. It's muhhh.

Spaceballs script was silly and they acted it that way. And that is why Spaceballs worked..

Corman spent money on a veteran cast of distinguished actors. They are incredible. The problem is they are acting against a really lame script with a seriousness that makes the performances on a par of the lamest soap opera.. The worst script John Sayles has ever produced. The only thing worst is Jimmy T Murakami's direction. Did he ever hear of irony? Humor? Beats? Energy? Talent?

Watch it once and you'll know how not to spend $2,000,000 on a movie. It's so bad that it's bad.

Cruel Summer (2021–2023)

I wasn't going to like this, but I did.

[7/10 · 30 June 2021]

A long time ago it got some good reviews, so I dvr'd it. It had already ended, so over a 3 day period I watched it. Considering the demographics of the commercials, I am not the audience that it was intended for. In fact, after the first episode I was set to erase the series from my disc. (How many stories about a group of hypocritical Texans can you can you watch?)

After awhile the 3 year story cycle and the ambiguity of the characters pulled me in. I really enjoyed the way they dealt with the characters. This is first rate.

The bad people aren't as bad as you think they are...and the good people aren't as good. I know the CW has a niche. This storytelling is so refreshing that it expand beyond that.

I really hope that those involved in this YA drama would go with a really adult story. But as it is, they took something that could be nothing and turned it into a wonderfully complex story. In the end I really enjoyed it...and that's what it's all about.

It Came from Outer Space (1953)

Best seen in 3D

[8/10 · 9 May 2021]

An early 3D picture (it was Universal's first), well worth seeing the way it was meant to be seen. Based on a Ray Bradbury short story, it is Sci-Fi for adults. The extra-terrestrials have made a stop on earth to repair their ship. They are indifferent to humanity. They are not here to help or conquer. All they want to do is do some repairs and go home.

It's refreshing to see visitors from space who are not interested in conquest (Star Trek's prime directive). Production value is good for such a low budget film. Seeing it in 2D is nice. Seeing in 3D really does (obviously) add an extra dimension. See it the way it was meant to be seen. You won't be disappointed.

Doctor X (1932)

Strange in more ways than one.

[8/10 · 30 April 2021]

A scalpel is pronounced SKApel. A heart is kept alive by electrolysis (even though it's not hairy). Synthetic flesh can grow hair and animate limbs. You can find a murderer by monitoring their brain waves when watching them view a re-enactment of the murders they've committed.

On the face of it, it's really silly. But this early serial killer movie is very entertaining.. Yes it is dated...1932!...but the dialogue is snappy. The improbable story is breezy and fun...and then there is the eating of human flesh.

In a very surreal way, it's a lot of fun. Give it a try.

The Ten Commandments (1956)

Dated in the 19th Century.

[4/10 · 5 April 2021]

There's a form of acting called Delsarte. At the beginning of the 20th century it was very popular. Early silent films are a great example. It is superficial, but it tells the audience in a short way what the internal feelings of a character are.

It is demonstrative. Many years later the acting was more internal...more subjective...but the Actor's Studio's influence was years away. The acting here is very Delsarte (ex: a hand to the forehead to show despair).

At 60+ years this film is an incredible production. It is also stuck in amber. Wooden (almost laughable) performances. Sexist costumes (male and female).

The film is very long. The performances are painful at times. The production values are incredible.

For all it's earnestness, it is not a very good movie.

There are a great many enjoyable movies to watch that were made before 1960. This one in modern terms it does not hold up. But for 1956 it is an incredible production. In film history it is a must watch. In current times, it is only a curiosity.

Star Trek: Picard (2020–2023)

Data's Children

[7/10 · 7 November 2020]

Picard is about growing old and losing lhose around you. It is about regret. It is about second chances. It is a continuation of the final ST:TNG movie. Data has given his life to save Picard and Picard is lost because of it. After all this time 90 year old Picard (played by 80 year old Stewart), can not forgive himself for the death of his friend. When a young woman presents herself as Data's daughter, he feel he must do everything he can to protect Data's legacy. The theme of loss and regret occur over and over in this handsomely produced production (See Ryker and Seven Of Nine). True Star Trek is based on the concept that the complexity of being human...compassion...hope...brotherhood...self-sacrifice...is what makes humanity noble. The nobility of humanity no matter what planet (or country) you are from is what Star Trek is all about. Star Trek: Picard fulfills that mission.

Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)

Luke and Leia deserve better.

[2/10 · 29 March 2018]

There are so many good insightful negative reviews of this film that expose it's numerous flaws at length; I've decided to keep this much too long, wrong spirited second installment of the current series brief.

Others have written of the massive plot point holes. (Why wait until all but one of the rebel ships are destroyed, when one ship could have used it's jump capabilities to destroy the enemy fleet....Why has Luke become so darkly arrogant...why are Leia and Poe so unimaginative and stupid...why do bombs fall in space when there is no gravity...etc...)

Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), even at his darkest, was never so arrogant. Leia Organa) Carrie Fisher, at her lowest point, was never so ineffectual (follow me, sky boys!) Once upon a time she had spunk! and he had grit! Rian Johnson should reread Campbell. He knows nothing of heroes and myth. How could anyone okay such a destruction of two incredible iconic characters. Jar Jar Binks was Hamlet compared to the way these characters were written.

They should have hired Kasdan. At least he knew what Star Wars was about. Shame on Disney. Universal removed Roddenberry from Star Trek. Now Disney removed Lucas from Star Wars. Do these suits have any idea what they are doing.

Rise (2018)

I wanted to like it, but I couldn't.

[5/10 · 20 March 2018]

The characters are two dimensional. The conflict is card board. They don't show you their motivation, but they do spell it out for you in dialog over and over again.

The show might get better, but going by the terrible pilot script...who knows. Yes, pilots hit you over the head; but do they have to be this trite...this obvious...this paint by number...this earnestly silly.

I hope they get a long run, but they lost me at the pilot.

Somewhere Between (2017)

A definite miss.

[3/10 · 9 August 2017]

It could have worked. Everything is there. It just is a little off. This series shows what happens when everything could work, but it doesn't.

The premise is simple. What would you do if you could go back in time knowing what you already know and save the killing of your loved one. An interesting premise. They just don't pull it off.

The main two problems (and they are main) is the nitty-gritty writing and direction. I can live with the fantastical elements in the plot. It is the mundane ones that sink the story.

There is no way a Govenor of a state would re-instate the death penalty because a serial killer is slaughtering his citizens. There is no way a child would run away to a stranger's party without Child Services being called in. There is no way a husband could put his wife on a No-Fly List for a personal reason without a court hearing. The number of "there is no way"s on the most mundane plot points is staggering.

Then there is the acting. It is so over the top. The director seems to let everyone work at 10 when 5 would have made more sense. And the little girl at the center of the story (the McGuffin) is so obnoxious, the viewer wishes the murder to happen sooner and not later.

In more capable hands this could have been something.

Downward Dog (2017)

How much can you really enjoy spending time with such a clinging obsessive dog.

[3/10 · 3 July 2017]

In 1955 Americans were introduced to a basset hound named Cleo in a sit-com called "The People's Choice". Her owner played by Jackie Cooper as Socrates Miller just tried to make it through life. Cleo, as all good basset hounds do, would comment on his foibles in a funny and endearing manner. The comedy was funny (1950s TV style) and lasted for 104 episodes. It really was funny.

In 2017 Americans were introduced to a mixed breed named Martin in "Downward Dog". His owner played by Alison Tolman as Nan just tried to make it through life in the 21st Century. Martin as all good mixed breeds do would go on and on with some of the most depressing and obsessive commentary that any good health care professional would find deeply disturbing and lasted 8 episodes. It was a dramaedy that was depressing and not very funny.

As talking dog shows go, Downward Dog went. Dear comedy writers...next time, make it funny.

GLOW (2017–2019)

On a purely technical note

[9/10 · 26 June 2017]

it is a Dolby Vision to enjoy. I realize that most reviews will talk about story, acting, etc…the essence to any good review.

If you have a 4K TV with Dolby Vision you are in for a treat. As of mid 2017, program content in Dolby Vision is pretty rare. Netflix is offering GLOW in Dolby Vision and it is beautiful.

Even if I hated GLOW (I don't), I would watch it more than once. You have to see it to be believed.

Technically speaking, it will open your eyes.

Someday This Pain Will Be Useful to You (2011)

A confused 17 yr. old faces the horror of going to Harvard University in the fall.

[2/10 · 9 June 2017]

Oh the inhumanity of being wealthy, young and over privileged while living the easy life in Manhattan. His parents are divorced (though he "works" at his mother's art gallery and has full use of his father's beach front "cottage"). His grandmother dies and leaves him her home and it's contents. To think his parents want him to sell it all for...money! Such heartache. Such drama.

The acting is first rate. Cinematography and production values are good. The one problem is the script. When the revolution comes, these people will be the first ones put up against the wall.

The characters are unsympathetic. The problems are nonexistent. It's not funny enough to be comedy and not serious enough to be tragedy. All it is, is a group of self-centered rich people stroking themselves. What a waste of 95 minutes.

InAlienable (2007)

Fan boys/girls will enjoy the casting.

[6/10 · 4 June 2017]

Actors from the Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica, V and Babylon 5 universes meet in this low budget sci-fi picture.

The premise is different. A man gives birth to a being from outer space. And unlike John Hurt's character in "Alien", he survives. The script does ask some interesting question as to what is the definition of Human. (Shade of Gene Roddenberry)

This could have been a much better picture. The director and cinematographer are not very good. For such a veteran cast, many of the performances play the same one note stilted performances. The lighting is too bright and almost flat. I've seen sit-coms with more atmospheric lighting. In more talented hands, this could have been a much better picture. You can easily see the possibilities that would have made it better. Sadly, it is what it is.

Still, nostalgia alone makes it worth a watch.

Wolf Creek (2016–2017)

Entertaining...if only it had ended.

[6/10 · 6 April 2017]

As an American, I enjoyed seeing a part of Australia that rarely gets seen. Southern Australia offers an incredible landscape with wonderful vistas...and it would seem, a great many flies.

The acting is first rate. The story is compelling. This series offers us a world we do not often see.

But like Jason Voorhees, Freddy Kruger and Michael Myers before him; Mick Taylor has one flaw that I find irritating. Why is it these serial killers simply do not die at the end? Could it be as simple as that the storytellers want to make a sequel?

Please, someone, kill the bad guy off just once! Despite this, I enjoyed Wolf Creek the series almost until the final shot.

The Neon Demon (2016)

The visuals are pretty.

[2/10 · 24 March 2017]

Just saw this on a German 4K blu-ray import w/o HDR. (The US blu-ray is only standard HD.) It looks wonderful. If you need a beautiful silent picture running in the background...this is for you.

As for the actual film...it's slow. Very slow. The acting is incredibly stilted. The plot's silly. It's not scary or frightening. There is no build up of tension. Neither cannibalism nor necrophilia even make this one dimensional story interesting.

It is difficult to say much about a movie that knows nothing of character development (there isn't any), plot (minimal) or emotional impact (none)...but it looks great on my 4K TV.

It Happened at Nightmare Inn (1973)

Aka A Candle For The Devil

[7/10 · 25 March 2016]

Every movie is made up of a series of edits to what the filmmaker originally shot. This can turn a good film to bad and vice versa. The most famous is the very different versions that exist of Orson Welles' "Touch Of Evil". "Night And The City" and "Mad Wednseday"/"The Sin Of Harld Diddlebock" exist in two different version of the same source material. That is also true with "It Happened At Nightmare Inn" and "A Candle For the Devil". It is sad that IMDb does not see the difference in these very, very different cuts of the same source material. But the versions are all different from their counterparts.

"It Happened At Nightmare Inn" is not very good. The more sexually charged "A Candle For The Devil" is far more interesting. In 1973, "Candle" probably could not be shown in the U.S. The theme of sexual repression caused by religious fervor is very different from a couple of crazy ladies who like to kill young women.

Pass on "It Happened At Nightmare Inn". "A Candle For The Devil" is worth a look.

The Night Shift (2014–2017)

Blue medicine in a red state

[3/10 · 31 May 2014]

This show has very strange politics.

The emergency room is having a hard time staying open because of "cut backs and Obamacare" is this fictional Texas hospital.

But the poor infant can't have dialysis because of no insurance. (Had Texas increased medicaid coverage as offered by Obamacare,the child would be covered.) The hospital janitor's daughter can't get a scan of the lump on her abdomen because of no insurance. (But if she's under 26 years old, she's covered under her father's policy under Obamacare.) The hot Doctor's medical education was paid 100% by the U.S. Government because he was in the army at the time. I'm confused. Is the message: The government should have universal health insurance coverage and pay for the education of our doctors...even in the state of Texas?

That said... The characters are no strangers to medical dramas. There is the tough administrator who may have a heart of gold; the second in command who is smart, very good looking and compassionate; the macho closeted gay doctor, the nurse who... well, you get the idea. It's been done before in countless number of medical show that barely made it to 13 episodes. Still, if you like that sort of show (and I do), it's worth a watch.