Change Your Image
playerazzi
Reviews
The Good Dinosaur (2015)
What the hey was this?
Any Pixar entry into the world of 3D animation comes with a great deal of baggage. We expect a top-notch movie, with excellent dialogue, an interesting plot, some lessons to be learned, intriguing characters, and cutting-edge animation.
So I was disappointed to see only the last item in The Good Dinosaur. The movie deals with a pre-industrial level farm, manned by family of dinosaurs. The farm is located in a Western America type of location, on a little flat piece of ground near a river downstream from some mountains that look like the Grand Tetons.
The father and mother work the farm until three children are born, who are expected to help. Arlo - the hero of our story - is the runt of the family, hatched incongruously from the largest egg. Why he was hatched from the largest egg yet is the runt is never explained. His brother Buck and sister Libby - hatched at the same time - manage to carry out their work, and get to leave their mark on the family storage container, yet little Arlo is not able to do this. He feels left out and disappointed.
Until - well, something happens, and Arlo and Dad are thrown into a challenge against elements of nature and against man - or rather - dinosaur kind. With a classic scene taken right out of Lion King, and a detour to a Western (T-Rexes gallop like horses), Arlo tries to get back home with the help of a loin-cloth clad "creature". This creature is a human boy about 10-ish, crawling on all fours and baying like a wolf. Arlo and Creature try to get home together, but the messages given and emotional challenges are weak and not clear. It's like going on vacation with your family, and if I wanted to go on vacation with my family to Yellowstone National Park, I would have packed the car and headed off, not gone to the movies.
The characters are not memorable, there are no cool lines like Inside Out's "ruined pizza" line, or many others. In short, I am forgetting this forgettable movie.
One thing I will grant it: the scenes of Arlo and others in a river flood were so realistic as to raise the standard of 3d animation once again, which is what Pixar does so well. If that's what you like, then go see this movie.
But if you want to see an interesting story and interesting characters, pass on this one.
Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)
Oh, Brother, Leave it Alone
The movie starts with Kirk and McCoy violating the Prime Directive. We don't know why, we just know that it is happening. We never find out exactly what they were doing on this primitive planet.
And the Enterprise literally underwater? And then flies through the air!? It's a *space*ship, newsflash!
And then it goes from bad to worse. Zachary Quinto's Spock is robot- like, and Nimoy's Spock, although certainly "logical" was never quite robot-like. He was always a real entity.
The original Kirk was someone we could rely on, a rock. This Kirk is a wild card, and he gets wilder.
And Scotty resigns his post.
And don't get me started about this Spock-Uhura romance that, in this movie, turns sour and muddles things up.
And Khan again !? Enough already with Khan! Come up with something new. Oh, right, Khan with a British accent.
It was at this point that I gave up.
Look, this is an action-packed space opera that has a complicated plot without too much going for it. I was not involved at all.
But it's not Star Trek.
Casino (1995)
All Talk, and a Few Bombs and Blows
Ah, I was so looking forward to this one. It had all of the stars: De Niro, Pesci, Sharon Stone. Heck, it even had Don Rickles and Dick Smothers in dramatic roles (!) Not to mention Alan King (remember him?).
So, it was with anticipation that I got this one, and started to watch. It started out with a healthy dose of narration, reminding me of Goodfellas. But this time it was DeNiro doing most of the talking.
But then he didn't stop.
This is a three-hour movie, and about an hour of it, if not more (I didn't count the minutes) is Abe Rothstein (DeNiro), or sometimes Nicky Santoro (Joe Pesci), narrating the background. I mean, Ray Liotta did a good job in Goodfellas, but this is overboard, guys. Enough gabbing, and let's see the characters do what they do best, and let the story fold out through the scenes.
So, the story is about two gangsters, Abe Rothstein and Nicky Santoro, who are small-time bookies some place "back home" - in some non-descript town anywhere between Dallas and Cleveland, where gambling is definitely a no-no. The "bosses" there send Rothstein out to Vegas to manage a casino that they bankroll. Except for the source of the funds, Rothstein is now involved in a legitimate operation. And that's where the first conflict arrives: he's not used to being a law-abiding fellow. But he gets it real quick, and in no time at all, has a babe for a wife (who had warned him that she's not the marrying type), Ginger McKenna (Sharon Stone).
Then his buddy Nicky comes out to Vegas, and wants to help. But Nicky is the bouncer. The violent guy, and he wants to do it his way. So, he gums things up with his beatings, and threats, and stabbings. And these things are still illegal in Nevada, folks.
So, the rest of the movie is how these conflicts pan out: Abe Rothstein trying to be legit (and it's not only his own demons, but there are some shenanigans going on in official Nevada as well), trying to be married to a former call girl of a wife (who just can't keep her finger out of the white stuff, and still has the hots for her former pimp), and Abe trying to get along with Nicky, who just can't keep his hands - and switchblades - to himself.
Sounds like a cool gangster movie, and the potential is there, folks. In fact, I think not only the potential is there, but the scenes are there, too. The acting is fine (although DeNiro has done better jobs elsewhere), but the killer here is the editing. There were just too many scenes that could have been cut out, and the movie pared down to 2 hours or so. It just went on and on and on.
So, if you want to see these guys on the screen, by all means watch this movie. But beware of the high price you pay in time invested.
Salt (2010)
Fantasy, Not Action
You know, I know that the movie makers here know that the Russians are no longer enemies. So when they try to make them the bad guys these days it rubs me the wrong way. It's just unrealistic.
And that's not the only unrealistic thing in this movie. The violations of physics (as Ebert says) finally got to me to be too much. Jumping from a semi-truck on one overpass down to another on the lower level and coming out with no injuries jars me when I watch it. This is not Spiderman here, it's supposed to be "real". But it's not. It's just unrealistic.
Nevermind the fact that there hasn't been a funeral for a American VP since, well, since a long time, I can live with the invented history. But to have an attempt on the Russian president without an historical background is too much for me. It's just unrealistic.
And having the main character being what she is, as we soon find out, is also just unrealistic. A mole in the CIA? For sure. But not like this. I expect a mole these days to either do it for the money or for Islam. This is neither. It's just unrealistic.
And the romance between Salt and her husband? No spark. Maybe I'm trying to compare it to Mr. and Mrs. Smith, where the romance had wonderful spark - no wonder, as they were probably not acting there. But still I expect to like the couple, and frankly, I was indifferent. It's just unrealistic.
And after being chased and injured (or not?), Salt is finally in custody in a helicopter above the Potomac in the winter. She jumps out, and lands in the water. No injury, no hypothermia. Quickly swims to shore and runs - soaking wet - did I mention she's dressed like it's June outside? I'm sorry, when I saw that, I just lost it. It's just unrealistic.
I can go on and on.
I know, I know, it's just a movie.
But I want to buy into the movie, I want to emotionally invest in the characters. And when there is so much that goes against common sense, I just can't do it.
It's just unrealistic.
Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)
Bizarre, Just Bizarre
My wife and I tonight sat through this. Well, we're still trying to figure out the purpose of the whole thing. Besides the fact that it is very dated (all those cigarettes are distracting and no longer realistic, for instance), the plot doesn't carry itself well. It's not clear why the characters do what they do and when they do it. Why is there a party? It's not clear what Peppard is until later. Why does Patricia Neal keep him? Is he that good-looking or something? And hey, was that really Buddy Ebsen's voice? Sure didn't sound like the Buddy Ebsen I know. I love Audrey Hepburn, and the song is wonderful, but she was wasted in this role.
Bottom line: skip it.
Columbo: Fade in to Murder (1976)
Does not Age Well
Wow. I was surprised. I remember Columbo positively, but this episode had poor acting, oh-too-obvious clues, and it just didn't "entertain". It was boring, pretentious and quite frankly, a bit immature. It was like the episode was made for pre-teens. I kept up with it because I'm a Star Trek fan (features, of course, Bill Shatner and a short appearance by Walter Koenig), and still want to like Columbo, but with this, I'm not sure anymore.
I could not empathize with the criminal (Shatner), I could not try to figure things out with Columbo, his genius was not obvious, as he just seems to come up with solution to the crime based on very flimsy evidence. When presented with Columbo's (correct) version of the crime, Shatner's character happily confesses. I mean, does he *want* to go to jail, if not get executed? It didn't seem like that to us. It seemed like he wanted to live his life without his victim, who was blackmailing him.
The whole thing was just too bizarre.
The Natural (1984)
Missed Opportunities
A great potential come-back story that misses too many opportunities.
Like, why did Harriet Bird (Barbara Hershey) shoot Roy Hobbs (Redford)? It was never made clear. That would have been a great sub-plot in itself. Say, she was his girl and was jealous of everything, and crazy to boot, and he didn't see it coming, and got it. Or something like that.
Or a hint that Roy *could* have fathered a child with Iris (Glenn Close). There wasn't even a hint, like in Forrest Gump. And the fact that he was "away" for 16 years doesn't add up. The kid who we see at the end for too little time is about 10-12 years old. He should be 16-ish, which could have him as a budding, tough High School player. It would have been poignant if he was a true star player, and that Roy, whom we only fleetingly learn is his Daddy at the end, would come back to become his pitching/hitting coach. But maybe I'm asking too much.
And besides, this is the 30'-50's. A woman who has a child out of wedlock would have been a scandal. Why was this fact ignored? And it was strange that she didn't marry. Why? Was she in love with Roy all the time and was waiting for him to come back? That, too, was alluded to, but the point wasn't driven home, so to speak. And when she did find him, Glen Close's reaction was much too subtle and un-emotional for my taste. This is the father of her only child for crying out loud. So, cry out loud.
And how and when did Roy make his decision to come back to play ball? This was quickly glossed over when Roy told Iris what had happened during the course of the 16 years apart, but it would have been dramatically worthwhile to see his "epiphany" of deciding to return.
And just how does Memo Paris (Kim Basinger) "jinx" Roy and cause him to play poorly? Does she distract him? Did she out-and-out bribe him, or convince him? Did she take up so much of his time that he was quite simply exhausted? It's not clear at all.
And when the Knights play poorly, they play like Little Leaguers. I mean, a team that plays like that just doesn't exist in major league ball. And not in AAA,AA,A, nor rookie ball. Now, I don't mean to get too technical here, but showing them playing like that is going overboard. They should have shown them playing OK, but there was a "je ne sais quois" missing. A mental "push" that helps them play truly top quality ball. And that mental inspiration is Roy Hobbs.
Now, it was made clear that he inspired the team to improve, no question about it. And it was made clear that "Bump" (Michael Madsen) the right-fielder, was throwing the game, being bribed by The Judge (Robert Prosky).
So, I agree with Roger Ebert in this case. It is a movie about idolizing Robert Redford, and it has very little to do with baseball.
Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi (2001)
Too much for me
OK, the animation per se is great. But that's it.
This is a romping, non-stop fantasy that takes us from one station to the next with no map in between. Wherethehellarewe?
It is actually a scary movie, and I didn't understand the point in it.
Our protagonist, Chihiro (sounds like Tihiro in the movie), is moving to a new town, which will bring a new school, and new friends, and she's not sure she can handle that. When their parents take a wrong turn, and Dad gets out of the car to explore the landscape, they end up in a "trap", in which her parents are tempted by delicious food, and turned into pigs. With me? Hold on.
Now, Chihiro is befriended by Haku, a young feller who should be a romantic interest for her. But this doesn't really pan out, maybe because she is so young. Haku befriends her, and instructs her in how to get her parents back. She must do this by passing many tests. One of which is being able to identify her pig-parents from amongst the many pigs in the sty. What's the point here? Dunno.
So, she's got to go through this bath-house where spirits come to get washed up. Huh? Yea, well, hold tight there . . . Seems the lady in charge (with a really gross huge face reminiscent of - yes - the Queen of Hearts of Alice fame) is a witch by the name of Yababa (sounds like I'm-baba in the movie), and for some reason she can get Chihiro out. But she first steals her name. OK, nevermind.
Hoo-boy.
If you are American or European, forget it. Especially if you don't like fantasy (I don't, can you tell?)
What I *did* like was seeing hints of Japanese culture, such as:
* They drive on the left side of the road.
* The new town is in the hills. Where are there NOT hills in Japan?
* They eat with chopsticks. Cool.
* Protocol - ie, how you behave and manners - is very important.
Chihiro doesn't know when she is going "inside", and so when she forgets to leave her shoes she is reminded that she is going inside. 'Nuff said.
* This is the best - the most horrible monster is a Sludge Monster, who brings sludge and guck into the bathhouse. This is the most frightening thing - not a thief, not a drug pusher, not a rapist, not a murderer, no, no, that's not scary. The most frightening thing is to get sludged and all dirty. To the clean-conscious Japanese this must be a horrible prospect indeed.
* When Yababa steals Chihiro's name, she does so by taking four of the five Kanji characters used to spell "Chihiro", and leaving one, thereby spelling "Sen". I do not read Japanese, but this was clear to me. Super Cool.
* Trains are used for important transportation, as they are in Japan.
* Chihiro and Len sit down and eat this Japanese food that looks like falafel, wrapped up all neat. Anyone know what it is?
* Finally, and this I learned by reading the posts here, Shinto, the Japanese religion, is animist. This means that inanimate objects are imbued with a "spirit" . . . . <***SPOILER***> ------------------------------------------ Chihiro says she "knows" Haku, and apparently Haku is not a feller at all, but a river spirit re-incarnated into human form. Well, he's occasionally a dragon. He's a switch-hitter. First time Chihiro sees him as a dragon, she knows it's him, but why this is so is never made clear. Anyway, Haku the river spirit once saved Chihiro's life when she fell into the river at one point.
Bottom line: just BORROW the video, don't spend a dime on it. Or a yen. Whatever.
Slide, Babe, Slide (1932)
Nice Surprise
Like the previous poster, I discovered this on the "For Love of the Game" DVD. It was not listed on the DVD at all, I just snooped around, right-clicked on Title 6, Chapter 2, and voila.
The acting was atrocious, reminded me of Our Gang, but who cares? It was very cute, we got to see America of the 30's: Steam locomotives, sandlot baseball with those tiny "gloves" they used, rocks for bases, a mattress for the catcher's chest guard, a tiny umpire with attitude, and a rural way of life. Babe, originally rejected to play by the 10-year-old manager, gets in the game when the runner at first is called home by Mom to finish choppin' the wood. And Babe looked great, as he was only about 37 years old at the time. Took a lot of nerve sliding on a field with all those rocks and thorns.
Star Trek (1973)
It should have been canon
Well, I really must disagree with the Late Great Bird of the Galaxy (*). He said that this series should not be canon, but I think it should.
The stories were good, including many of the original writers, and even a story by Hugo/Nebula award winner, Larry Niven. The animation was - well - let's say Disney animation tastes like a fine, high quality, Austrian cake, and ST's animation tastes like cardboard.
If you are a ST-TOS fan, well, get every single episode here.
If you are a ST-TNG+ fan, try one out, preferably Yesteryear, or More Tribbles, and then decide if you want to see more. There are some silly ones.
** out of *****
(*) This is Gene Roddenberry, for the uninitiated