Reviews

29,446 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Quark: Goodbye, Polumbus (1978)
Season 1, Episode 4
5/10
A very slight improvement....slight.
18 April 2024
"Goodbye, Polumbus" is an episode's title which makes fun of a Richard Benjamin film, "Goodbye, Columbus". And, like the prior three episodes, it seems heavily influenced by a "Star Trek" episode...in this case "Shore Leave".

Quark is ordered to investigate planet Polumbus. This is because no ship that lands there is ever heard of again...so it's apparently another suicide mission for this ship and its crew. However, it turns out the reason the other ships never returned is because there is a device on the planet which gives folks whatever they wish for...and they just have no interest in anything else.

This episode is slightly better than the previous episodes...slightly. I think it's because the episode was more plot-driven than one looking for as many cheap laughs. Not great but watchable.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Quark: The Good, the Bad, and the Ficus (1978)
Season 1, Episode 3
4/10
Not great....but not exactly terrible either.
18 April 2024
En route to a mission, Quark's ship gets sucked into a black hole. They do survive but don't realize that the ship has been split into two duplicates...one 'nice' and the other 'evil'. The evil one runs amok blowing up ships and acting jerk-like...so it's up to the nice ship and its crew to stop them...or the grouchy Admiral Flint (Geoffrey Lewis) will do it in a most heavy-handed manner!

While this episode is watchable, like the previous ones in the series that I have reviewed, it just isn't very funny.

The plots to this and the previous episode both are very similar to "Star Trek" episodes from a decade before this. This is much like the "Mirror, Mirror" episode as well as "The Enemy Within".
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Quark: The Old and the Beautiful (1978)
Season 1, Episode 2
4/10
About as good as the second episode...which isn't great.
18 April 2024
In this episode of "Quark", something unusual happens. Instead of getting yet another suicide mission, Quark is sent to romance a space princess. But on the way, they come upon some space garbage and when Quark goes into the hold to unjam the trash, Quark has begun aging rapidly. But once he's done he STILL continues to age rapidly and unless they find a cure quickly, he's doomed as is the mission.

"The Old and the Beautiful" is about as good as the previous episode...meaning, it's not particularly great but is watchable. Richard Benjamin's acting as an old man is pretty poor and there aren't all that many laughs.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Quark: May the Source Be with You (1978)
Season 1, Episode 1
4/10
A definite improvement over the pilot episode.
18 April 2024
The pilot episode of "Quark" is a great example of terrible TV. The comedy suffered from two major problems in the pilot....it wasn't funny and the laughtrack was omnipresent and even the unfunniest of things were accompanied by roaring laughter! As a result, I really hated the show. But I also know that pilot episodes often are very different from later episodes...so perhaps "May the Source Be With You" is better...something which is NOT hard to imagine!

The evil Gorgon has invaded and just like in the pilot, the only ship seemingly available is Quark's garbage ship! Though the mission seems impossible, the Head gives Quark 'The Source' to help with the mission. As for the source, it talks but is obviously making fun of the Force in "Star Wars". Do they stand a chance??

So is the show as bad as the pilot? No. While it's not great, some improvements are less use of the laughtrack (which still was overused) and getting rid of Professor O. B. Mudd and replacing him with the Spock-like 'Ficus'...who is mildly amusing. Overall, a poor episode which is a HUGE improvement over the prior episode.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Quark: Quark (1977)
Season 1, Episode 0
1/10
Another show ruined by a godawful and ever-present laughtrack!
18 April 2024
When I was a kid, I liked "Quark" and was sad when it was canceled after only eight episodes. However, I've re-watched a few shows I loved as a kid...and some really suck when you see them today! Will "Quark" be one of these? And, the best place to start to see if it's any good is the pilot episode.

The show begins by showing Quark and his ship...a giant galactic garbage truck in space. Then, as a quick way quickly introduce the characters, Captain Quark talks to his computer about their mission. However, unlike the following episodes, Ficus is not in the cast and instead Professor O. B. Mudd appears.

The mission that Quark is given is a suicide mission, which doesn't bother his superiors very much. Instead, however, the ship's horny robot manages to accidentally find a non-suicidal way to solve their problem.

So is it any good? No. The biggest problem is the way that the laughtrack was used...which was near-constant AND never seemed to be whenever anything funny actually happened...which was never now that I think about it. Unfunny, annoying and I am hoping things will change for the better with the first regular episode. If not, I'll bail on this series.

By the way, sensibilities have changed since this show was aired. The bi-sexual type character is bound to offend many today.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
With a name like "Meatcleaver Massacre" you certainly don't expect a masterpiece!
18 April 2024
With a movie called "Meatcleaver Massacre" (also known as "Hollywood Meatcleaver Massacre"), you don't expect great art or a film with Oscar nominations. In fact, you'd likely assume it is dreck...and even that's too kind for this bottom of the barrel picture.

Now, you might be tempted to think it won't be that bad. After all, it stars Christopher Lee and begins with him lecturing the audience about evil. But it turns out his speech was actually made for a different film and the production company sold it to another one. This way, Lee was acting in a movie he'd never heard of because they'd inserted him into another movie without his permission! So it's crap...but also SLEAZY crap! And, he really didn't star in any movie...just a brief lecture on evil.

Four college students brutally attack a professor and his family. The wife and kids are dead but the professor, from his coma, contacts the evil demon Morak...offering him his soul IF he allows the professor to see his revenge. What follows is about what you'd expect...gore, lousy production values, terrible acting, and lots of fake blood in this nasty little movie.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Another kitschy Hollywood version of Baghdad.
18 April 2024
Hollywood made several very kitschy films in the 1940s-50s which were supposedly set in ancient Baghdad. A few, despite their cheesiness, were still quite enjoyable such as "Cobra Woman" and "The Thief of Bagdad". Most, however, were more like "Kismet"...all glitz, lousy writing and actors who looked nothing like Iraqis. Unfortunately, "Babes in Bagdad" falls in the latter group...lousy writing, glitz and actors who bore no resemblance to anyone from the region.

The film stars Paulette Goddard, a pretty big star in the early 1940s but whose star had almost completely faded by the 1950s. In fact, she was offered so few roles that perhaps she was lucky to score the lead in this one. Supporting her are Gypsy Rose Lee, the famous stripper, and John Boles in his last movie.

When the story begins, the newest addition to Hassan's harem is Kyra (Goddard). She should be thrilled to stay there and live a life of leisure but she quickly bores of the place and hatches a plan to appeal to the Caliph to free them...a 20th century notion that really didn't make any sense here. He isn't predisposed to do anything...but Hassan's son makes him a bet...one you know he'll end up winning by the end of the film.

As I mentioned above, this isn't a very good film. Mostly, it's poor because it is so little like ancient Bagdad and because it's awfully boring. Also, this might sound a bit mean, but it's hard to imagine Goddard being THAT alluring considering her best years were long behind her. Overall, a film so dull and unexciting I wouldn't even venture to call it a time-passer.

By the way, although the movie was filmed using 'Cinefotocolor', all the color had long ago disappeared from the print. This might explain WHY I'd never heard of Cinefotocolor until this movie.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good but a tad confusing....so pay close attention!
18 April 2024
Oliver Branwell (Jack Hawkins) is an insurance investigator. One of the cases he's assigned to brings Oliver a HUGE surprise...the claimant's wife is Sarah (Arlene Dahl)...a woman who disappeared out of his life some time ago. Later, Oliver has reason to suspect that Sarah and her husbands are crooks and they've sold cheap copies of paintings in their collection...keeping the originals. But before he can do anything, the evidence goes up in smoke when the manor home where Sarah and her husband had lived burns down...and Oliver nearly burns with it. While escaping from the fire, he discovers the body of Sarah's husband...and Oliver assumes he's been used. But because he is worried about exposing Sarah's possible crimes, he removes himself from the case. What's next? Well, a lot, as this only takes you to the middle of the story.

This is a VERY confusing film, so when you watch...watch carefully. Otherwise you'll find yourself going back to various portions to see them again so you can understand what has happened. The writing could have been better in this regard and the confusion is due to the writing...as the finale really didn't make a ton of sense. Otherwise, the acting is very good and the film is worth your time.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Police Dog (1955)
6/10
Much better than I expected.
17 April 2024
Frank is a policeman in London. Shortly after the story begins, Frank and his fellow foot patrolman partner give chase to a suspicious character. Frank is well behind when his partner catches up to the suspect. Surprisingly, the suspect pulls out a gun and shoots the policeman...and is able to escape. Frank is naturally upset and looks into integrating a police dog into his job. So, he takes a dog other cops thinks is too fierce and he soon turns Rex into a first class police doggy. But this helps to bring out hidden problems with Frank's relationship with Pat, as she's quite jealous of the dog and demands he give up either the dog or her. How does all this work out by the end of the movie?

In general, I avoid doggy movies. It isn't because I dislike dogs...heck, I've got one myself. But too many dog films are very schmaltzy...and, fortunately, "Police Dog" isn't schmaltzy nor poorly made. In fact, it's worth seeing. And, I do agree with the review that calls it "harmless British 'B' family film viewed by dog lovers and friend of Chris Lee".

By the way, if you do see this film note that Christopher Lee plays a cop...albeit a rather dim one! This is quite a departure for Lee as he often played clever, evil sorts in movies.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Eve (1968)
2/10
Slow and dull, and even Eve in her bikini isn't able to give this movie any life.
17 April 2024
"The Face of Eve" is a not particularly good film that probably isn't worth your time. However, if you like films like "Sheena" or other Tarzan knockoffs, you might want to give it a try...but I wouldn't.

Mike Yates (Robert Walker Jr.) is an adventurer who is in the Amazon region looking for some treasure. Along the way, a beautiful and VERY well-coiffed savage girl, Eve (Celeste Yarnall), comes to his rescue.

Later, after Mike is able to get to a town he tells folks about Eve...which is a problem since another woman is calling herself 'Eve' and is ingratiating herself to Eve's real grandfather, the Colonel (Christopher Lee). Well, the jig is up and the faux Eve and her baddie boyfriend (Herbert Lom) rob the grandpa and leave him for dead. Fortunately, Mike comes along and saves the guy...who now wants to partner up with Mike to find the treasure and his long-lost granddaughter.

There's no denying that this is a bad movie. Although Ms. Yarnall is lovely, she doesn't really get to talk* or act...just stand about in her leopard print bikini. As for the story itself, it's a cheapo jungle film complete with the usual trappings. At least the film didn't overuse stock footage of various jungle animals...like too many of these old films do.

By the way, both Walker and Yarnall made appearances on "Star Trek" and it was interesting to see them doing something different. Not GOOD but INTERESTING.

*The fact that the film is bad is something I rather expected because I usually read through the IMDB trivia before I watch a movie...and there are MANY signs the film would be terrible. They didn't even use Yarnall's voice in post-production! So, the voice you hear is actually some other lady...not Yarnall.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
It's okay but doesn't help the viewer to connect with the individual soldier.
17 April 2024
"They Were Not Divided" is a British WWII film about a Welsh tank unit that also seems to have a lot of Americans, Englishmen and Canadians among them. It takes place from just after Dunkirk in 1940 and ends with the fall of Germany.

The story is VERY episodic and character development is seemingly unimportant. This makes the film a bit less involving and cold than a typical war story...which is its biggest weakness. As a result, it comes off like a Cliff Notes version of the war in Europe. It's not terrible at all but could have been better.

By the way, most of the 'Americans' in the movie sound exactly like Brits TRYING to sound American. I think British viewers would not have noticed this, but Americans sure will be able to tell they aren't from home! Now I know how Brits feel when they watch American films with horrible British accents...such as Bert in "Mary Poppins"
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Port Afrique (1956)
4/10
When in doubt, start punching folks!
17 April 2024
Rip Reardon (Philip Carey) is a guy who has a strange disorder...disappearing and reappearing leg syndrome! I say this because throughout the story, the one-legged man limps in some scenes and not in others!

Regardless, Rip's back from the war and when he returns home to see his wife, she is freshly dead. The police say it was suicide but Rip knows it must have been murder. So, for the rest of the film, Rip runs about punching people until he learns the truth!

The bottom line is that this murder mystery isn't very mysterious and the acting is generally poor. It is, at best, a time-passer and is a bland film which is easy to skip as well.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A spy film should be MUCH more interesting than this one was.
16 April 2024
Despite a spicy title like "The Devil's Agent" and it being a spy story, this is an incredibly dull movie. I just expected so much more energy and thrills...but didn't get them.

Georg (Peter van Eyck) lives in Vienna in 1950. While his family had wealth and power during the Nazi era, now he is forced to live modestly. However, when he sees an old friend (Christopher Lee) and is invited into the Soviet sector to do some fishing, western operatives take notice. After all, the 'friend' is also Soviet spy...and they assume the communists are trying to recruit him as a courier. So, after meeting with BOTH sides, Georg decides to work for both the Soviets and the western powers. As such, it's tough to know where his loyalties actually lie.

Dull...slow...pondering...all words that seem appropriate for this movie. It's not terrible, but I almost wish it was because with a terrible film you have strong feelings. But with this one...I had none and had a tough time sticking with it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A great collection of horror actors stuffed into an overused story.
16 April 2024
"House of the Long Shadows" has one big thing in its favor. The producers were able to secure the services of four of the greatest living horror movie stars...Peter Cushing, John Carradine, Vincent Price and Christopher Lee. I am sure that for that reason alone many came to see the movie when it was released. But it also has two big things against it. First, it was made by Cannon Films and most of Cannon's output was just plain bad...dopey action films mostly but also a few other, mostly second and third-rate offerings. Second, its story is ancient...with at least eight different prior versions as well as the original play. So, if you are familiar with "Seven Keys to Baldpate" by Earl Derr Biggers*, there won't be all that many surprises...and, sadly, I've seen a few versions of this story already and the big surprising twists at the end didn't come as any surprise. Plus, even the original story is a bit dull and predictable even if you aren't familiar with it.

A young author (Desi Arnaz Jr.) makes a bet with his publisher...that he can create an entire story, albeit a formulaic one, in less than 24 hours. All the publisher needs to do is arrange for some home where the author can write it. But again and again and again, various oddball characters show up in this mansion which no one has used in decades. Coincidence? Probably not. But what exactly is going on here?

The acting by these veteran actors is very good. The story itself....not so much. The score of 6 is purely for the four actors and some nice atmosphere...but not much more.

*Earl Derr Biggers is known today as the creator of Charlie Chan.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
I think it would have helped a lot had I been familiar with the Jane comic from "The Mirror".
16 April 2024
From Wikipedia: According to Christopher Lee, "only the technicians, working with a grim sense of purpose, were pros in the proper sense. Everybody other function, from direction to walk on parts, was up for grabs." He called the film "a truly grisly free for all" and a "Z feature". He says the cast were forced to watch the film being previewed and he found the experience extremely embarrassing.''

Jonathan (Christopher Lee) draws comic strip and Penny (Peggy Evans) is his model. I read in another review that the strip is based on a real life strip about a character named Jane....but I know nothing first hand about this and the paper, "The Daily Mirror", where it appeared.

It turns out that the comic strip is somehow connected to a murder. It seems that the dead man was a Nazi hunter and perhaps these wanted men are responsible for the death. Penny is keen to help the police with the case.

So, is it as dreadful as Lee said? Well, it isn't great and some of the acting (Lee's included) is a bit dodgy. I found it hard to keep paying attention, so obviously the plot could have been better.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Amazing animation...but not much more.
15 April 2024
The stop-motion animation by Sanrio Studios is really lovely in "Nutcracker Fantasy" and reminds me a lot of the Rankin-Bass specials, though the characters are even prettier and more well animated. That being said, the story itself is confusing and I cannot see most children enjoying or even understanding it. I know I struggled to figure out the story.

Much of the problem is that many of the characters are from "The Nutcracker" but the story itself isn't. Instead, it's just baffling. My advice is that if you do watch it, bring up the Wikipedia article for this animation and read along as you watch. Otherwise, you're likely to just feel baffled as I did.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Chris Mitchum...Mr. Charisma?
15 April 2024
"Dark Mission: Flowers of Evil" is a film which stars Robert Mitchum's son, Chris. While Chris never exactly became a movie star, he did manage to make a few movies...mostly in supporting roles. But here in this film, he has a chance to show whether he's leading man material. Judging by the scores of his films over the past couple decades, I would say he isn't exactly big star material.

In this story, Chris plays a guy who tells everyone he's a reporter who has arrived in Columbia to do a story about addiction and the drug trade. However, everyone seems to think he's either a gangster or a government agent. And, no matter where he goes, women just throw themselves at him.

One of these women just happens to be the daughter of a huge drug kingpin (Christopher Lee) and Chris isn't sure if she knows her father's business...especially since she was sent to the States for an education.

So is this film any good? Not especially. It's incredibly low energy and the film manages to do very little with its location shooting in Spain and Portugal. I blame the director for much of this. While I wouldn't say the movie is terrible...it's close.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Massarati and the Brain (1982 TV Movie)
2/10
Had the producers of "A Christmas Story" seen this before casting Peter Billingsley, I assume they would have picked some other kid for the lead.
15 April 2024
"A Christmas Story" is a classic and many people see it each year during the holiday season. However, one of the best things about this movie is one of the worst things in "Massarati and the Brain" (not to be confused with "Pinky and the Brain").... Peter Billingsley. Young Peter is great in the Christmas film and just awful in "Massarati" and I think some of it is age and experience. But the biggest difference is that "Massarati and the Brain" is just very badly written and stupid.

Massarati is a guy who works with his partner, Brain to do private eye stuff. Massarati is the brawn and very young Brain (Billingsley) is sort of like Q...the guy who is a super-genius and builds all sorts of gadgets. Now, considering Brain looks like he's about 8 years old, this plot is pretty much impossible to believe unless you are a very young and impressionable child.

So is there anything I liked about this film? No. Is there any reason for you to watch the film? Well, if you are a masochist, yes...otherwise, no. It's badly written, pretty dumb and a waste of talent (Christopher Lee is in the film). Plus, who wants to see an action/adventure film involving an adult and a little kid?! It's pretty creepy now that I think about it in addition to being dumb.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Pirate (1978 TV Movie)
5/10
I was a bit less impressed with this one.
15 April 2024
Currently, there are three other reviews for "The Pirate". However, two aren't really reviews...just folks asking where they can find the film (it's currently on YouTube). And, the other, is a recollection about how good the film was several decades ago. In this case, I just finished the movie...though it turned out to be three hours long, not the four listed on IMDB.

The story begins with a Jewish guy seeking shelter along with his pregnant wife in the area which later would become Israel. It's a tragic night for both of them, as the Jewish man's wife dies during childbirth and the Arab's* child dies in childbirth. With such a tragedy, the Jewish father has a suggestion...that Samir Al Fay (father of the dead child) and his wife raise his newborn son. Fay does this and the child is never told that he's actually Jewish.

Many years pass. This boy is now a very important man--both in the oil industry and among the Arab people. Despite having so much and being already married with daughters, Baydr Al Fay (Franco Nero) manages to think with his second brain and has an affair with an American, Jordana (Anne Archer). He wants her to marry him...she doesn't want to be wife #2 in a Muslim man's home. When Jordana becomes pregnant, she manages to convince Baydr to divorce his wife...a pretty sleazy thing for both of them. But he's thinking with his second brain and does as she demands.

For a while, things are just ducky and Jordana has agreed to raise their son, Muhammad, as a Muslim and learning Arabic. But she isn't true to her word and lets his lessons lapse. She also begins demanding more and more and more of her husband...until eventually she overplays her hand and he begins to resent her. She soon takes on a lover and the marriage is essentially over. But what neither anticipate is one of Baydr's daughters has now gotten in with an extremist terrorist group...much of it because she hates her step-mother so much...and who can blame her?! What's next? Well, it won't be good!

Despite being based on a Harold Robbins novel, the film has less sex than I expected and a bit more action. However, I also found the film very frustrating. Jordana was a very poorly written character and her marrying such an important Muslim man and expecting SHE would be the boss in that home is beyond naive to the point of being stupid. Also, the ending...very stupid. While I could accept the notion of Samir Al Fay adopting a Jewish baby, the notion of a partnership between the Israeli secret services and Baydr near the end just defies common sense and is hardly believable...just as it's hard to believe a woman as dumb as Jordana...two big problems with the plot. At times, moderately enjoyable but also a film that makes you wonder at how little Robbins seemed to understand the Middle East.

*While you'd think Al Fay and his family are Palestinians, as they live in what later became Israel, though the film is clear to point out that they ARE Arabs.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
There are at least four versions of this movie...and is this 3rd one worth seeing?
14 April 2024
There have been at least four versions of this story*. The original silent version is the best, though the sound remake with Peter Lorre is awfully good. The 1962 version, sadly, is so bad it's almost unwatchable. So what about this 1960 British version? Is it worth your time? It's current rating of 5.6 might seem to indicate the answer, but I decided to watch it and give it a chance.

Shortly after the story begins, the great concert pianist, Orlac (Mel Ferrer) is in an accident and he loses his hands. Considering how important these hands are, it's not surprising that the doctors would try something radical for 1960...give him a double hand transplant! But what they don't realize is that the dead donor was a murderer...and somehow these murderous impulses have been passed on through the hands to Orlac!

Apart from some distracting music, there's nothing wrong with this film...nor anything particularly right about it either. You've got a great basic story but the acting (Ferrer was a fine actor....but not here) and look of the film is a bit cheap. My advice is see one of the previous versions...they are both so much better and have much more energy than this slow version.

*There also was a short remake made for one of "The Simpson's" Halloween specials. In it Snake is finally executed for his infamous crimes and his cool head of hair is transplanted onto Homer...with expected results.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Keeper (1976)
3/10
If only hypnosis could work this way!
14 April 2024
"The Keeper" is frustrating. The basic plot is pretty interesting and it stars Christopher Lee...yet the story is pretty dull and the acting often rather poor.

The owner of a mental asylum (Lee) is a very bad sort. He uses hypnosis to make people do all sorts of bad things and he kills the family members of rich residents so that he can eventually gain control of their fortunes. He also kills off residents if the family finds them to be embarrassing or too much trouble. Most of the story is about private dicks' attempts to catch 'The Keeper' (Lee) and put him out of business.

This should have been interesting...but wasn't. Poor acting by all but Lee and the shoeshine boy are much of the problem, though cheap music and special effects also hinder the story.

By the way, in lots of films you see hypnosis being used in all sorts of evil and exploitive ways. Sadly, as a trained hypnotherapist, I have been unable to do any of this and want my money back!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Detonator (1993 TV Movie)
7/10
Just turn off your brain and enjoy
13 April 2024
My summary in no way means that "Death Train" is a bad movie. It's just the sort of action picture you need to watch without questioning details and just accept the film for what it is...action-packed and exciting but not much more.

Christopher Lee plays a disgruntled ex-Soviet general who longs for the good old days of the Cold War. His plan is to hijack a train with a nuclear bomb aboard and use it to destroy relations between the new Russia and the West. And, just in case one bomb doesn't seem to fit the bill, he's arranged for a backup. So it's up to a multinational team through the UN to stop them and that means Patrick Stewart will be in charge back out of harm's way and Pierce Brosnan and some other commandoes go in and try to take out the General's men before it's too late.

Lots of explosions, shooting and near misses. There isn't much more to this, but the film still manages to entertain. My only quibble, and it's a tiny one, is WHY does the female sharpshooter scream every time she shoots during the finale?!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Once Upon a Spy (1980 TV Movie)
3/10
Incredibly dated.
13 April 2024
"Once Upon a Spy" is a TV movie featuring Ted Danson as a computer genius and Christopher Lee as an evil computer genius, Marcus Velorium, bent on controlling the world...much like a Bond villain. But unlike Bond, there is no super-spy to stop the madman...only nice-guy Jack (Danson).

Being 1980, the concepts of computers sure isn't what we think of today. So, when a supercomputer that is the size of a city block is stolen, folks take notice. As a result, one of the foremost NICE computer scientists, Jack, is brought to a top secret location to talk to some humorless woman...and she recruits him to help investigate the theft. Naturally, the computer is being used to vaporize things from space...and I hate when that happens.

As I said above, in many ways this plays like a Bond film....a really bad one featuring a leading man who seems completely out of his element. I think this might have worked had it been more of a parody. Instead, however, it just seemed annoying and childish....and would not appeal to most adult viewers...unless you are curious what Danson was doing before he became famous. Even with the scene-chewing Lee as the baddie, this is pretty limp and dated.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
He reports his wife is missing...but is she 'missing'?
13 April 2024
"Diagnosis: Murder" is a most unusual film for Christopher Lee. Instead of playing a monster, a Satanist, a maniac or Sauron, he plays a seemingly 'normal' guy. Of course, he isn't! You see, Dr. Hayward's wife is missing...and the police soon realize that he might be their number one suspect, as Hawyward has been having an affair. This is also interesting, because his story, in some ways, parallels that of the investigating officer.

Overall, this is a mildly enjoyable police drama and is worth seeing...particularly if you want to see the very prolific Lee playing something different!

By the way, if you do watch the film, note the opening credits...they are pretty creative and cool.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Sort of like a Goofus and Gallant version of jungle survival!
13 April 2024
During WWII, many actors did their part to help with the war effort. Quite a few served in units overseas and saw action while others stayed home to make military training films. Actors such as George Reeves, Jimmy Stewart, Clark Gable and Van Helfin made such films. Surprisingly, many of these old training films still exist and can be found on YouTube. My favorite of these are the cartoons...made by directors, artists and voice actors from Disney, Looney Tunes, Walter Lantz.

"Land and Live in the Jungle" is a live action documentary designed to be shown to flight crews in the Pacific, as this B-25 bomber crew are forced to bail out over the dense jungle. The pilot, a true idiot through and through, gets separated from his men and makes mistake after mistake after mistake...showing viewers what NOT to do. The four crew members, however, remember their training and actually eat well and have plenty to drink. What does become of these men? See the surprisingly interesting film.

The only big star I recognized in this one was Van Heflin, who played the dopey pilot. At the end, he talks to the viewer...otherwise the entire film is narrated.

I was really shocked, as watching a film about jungle survival sounds dull as dirt...but it wasn't and the film holds up well today. An unusual curio to say the least.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed