Change Your Image
The Amazing Sharkboy
Reviews
Battlefield Earth (2000)
The sad thing is, the book was not a bad choice as source material
The movie comes across as confused and not engaging. But if the story (I'm playing armchair director here) had been carefully constructed and allowed to take its time - like a low budget mini-series on the sci-fi channel - it might have been worthwhile.
The book is not very deep (and despite its connection to Scientology, devoid of any real strong philosophy). The story is like a science fiction Horatio Alger story. Like the movie, Tyler - the main character - comes from a village that has lost most of its knowledge of civilization - to the point where the villagers don't even understand how livingnear radiation is causing birth defects among them. He also finds a quarter in the dirt and doesn't understand that it was a type of currency.
From this level of ignorance, he's able to learn about his alien enemies' language and technologies while he's their prisoner. Then, when he's able to escape, he's able to find and to bring together human allies from diverse cultures (Asian, Scottish, etc.) that were thought to be extinct (it's like the "working together against an alien oppressor" idea that Independence Day briefly touches on). From there he's able to bring real opposition to the aliens and even gain a position in a type of intergalactic government with other peaceful aliens.
All that's lost in the movie in order to make the story fit two hours. Much of the book gets long with the problems - one after another - that the humans must explore and solve as well as the various skirmishes they have to fight. But that continual progression and process from nothing to something - even though it's sometimes slow - is what makes the story interesting.
We'd have to really get to know a main character who has ingenuity and passion, often when he's working with no resources - and we're not allowed that in the film.
And making the aliens look too human really hurts the plot. In the book, they're basically monsters - that, while intelligent - have a sociopathic Nazi or fascist mentality. They look at humans as animals that are for their purposes better off dead, they can't stand the earth (or it's blue sky) and want the planet for its minerals.
I understand that creating such creatures would have been much more complicated than actors in makeup. And the movie makers might have been worried that an audience would tune out if they had watched scenes of dialogue between inhuman creatures (especially if it was difficult to make those aliens expressive). But if the aliens look too human, we start to identify with them too much and maybe expect the two races to establish some connection.
Though humans in real life are capable of horrible things, this story wants to believe that we're basically good (especially if we're the underdogs). It works best for this plot if our negative traits are projected onto a narcissistic enemy that looks nothing like us. Then it's easier to understand how they can be so mentally removed from us, and how they don't understand why they should even let our species live if we pose an obstacle to their imperial aims.
The Dead Will Tell (2004)
Talented people in a film that doesn't do much new in its genre
I wanted to like this movie. I did really. It tried hard. And why shouldn't CBS give us a spooky Sunday movie near Halloween?
Still, with a feminine heroine in a new marriage, learning another family's secrets, it just seemed reminiscent of a classic Gothic novel (maybe it should have been a period piece - naw, everyone thinks those cost too much).
There's a real effort in the direction to give an unsettling atmosphere, but it had a little too much quick cutting (to keep people interested who have short attention spans?).
Anne Heche gives a more honest and effective performance than other actresses that might have opted for this project. But many in the cast - such as Christopher Guest and Jonathan LaPaglia - are playing characters that were not written with much originality.
The plot makes sense, and there are the obligatory scenes of hallucination. Nice set design and photography. Yet Kathleen Quinlan and David Andrews seemed too young to be playing Jonathan La Paglia's parents.
A distraction, a good effort, not bad - but not much that's different.
If you like ghost movies with a murder mystery like this I suggest:
David Koepp's "Stir of Echoes" (1999) with Kevin Bacon - based on Richard Matheson's novel (overshadowed because it was released near the same time as The Sixth Sense)
or
Sam Raimi's "The Gift" (2000) co-written by Billy Bob Thorton - the unexpectedly solid performances from a rather varied group of actors - Cate Blanchett, Giovani Ribisi, Keanu Reeves, Greg Kinnear, Hillary Swank and the late Michael Jeter - make this unique.
The Opportunists (1999)
Former safe cracker reluctantly commits another crime to stay solvent.
I think the writer/director's aim was to make a simple crime story (on a low budget) that had a very credible and believable feel - presenting characters that seem to come from any local neighborhood. At this the movie succeeds.
The scenes and dialogue are carefully crafted and the film as a whole is very well cast and acted. I liked Walken's understated performance. It's consistent with the other actors. Also, it seems more natural and devoid of the self-acknowledging flippancy found in some of his other work.
The movie is low-key, and one can probably see the end coming. Yet someone looking for a caper film without contrived suspense or melodrama - and a little bit of a character study - will find this rewarding.
I Love N.Y. (1987)
Strange little film begs questions as to how and why it was made.
First of all, the tag line that IMDB has for this film is very funny.
I watched this movie on TV at 2:30 am while doing some paperwork and became curiously involved. Christopher Plummer, a bit part for Jerry Orbach, music by Bill Conti - can't be all bad, right? Though Gianni Bozzacchi choosing the Alan Smithee pseudonym to leave his name out of the credits is a bad omen. The overall result is a romance between two young lovers (with 1980s fashion overtones) that falls short of movies that could be considered similar such as "About Last Night" or "St. Elmo's Fire."
The performances are consistently credible and honest. Baio and Kelly Van der Velden have chemistry. Plummer and Sydney Coale each show genuine concern as single parents. Yet the predictable, somewhat low-energy story fizzles toward the end after making some strange choices. Baio's character causes an unbelievably stupid accident (this won't ruin anything - you'd see it coming from a mile away yourself) by attempting to photograph his girlfriend from underneath as they both ride a motorcycle across the Verrazano(?) bridge. In another scene Plummer, a professional actor, comes home shortly after a theater performance without removing his beard and makeup. He enters his daughter's room in the dark, briefly reciting lines from the production he's in before apologizing for restricting her social life. It's melodramatically odd. Also it's sometimes difficult to determine what causes disharmony between the two lead characters beyond their own neuroses.
Van der Velden is as good as any other young actress from the '80s. I'd expect her to have been involved in more films (Jennifer Beals found work in subsequent decades). But the only other database entry is a foreign film she did a few years earlier.
And why the title (which is repeated in the film)? Was funding provided by the New York City Visitors Bureau?
Weird recommendations for other films come up whenever I go to this movie's page . . .