Change Your Image
jhjenntex
Reviews
High Life (2009)
Another unrecognized gem!
Caught this on Showtime, and it struck me as a real gem flying low under the radar. Though obviously not big budget, it held my interest and really worked. Excellent script, acting, etc. (For some reason it reminded me of Dustin Hoffman's "Straight Time".)
While Showtime has far more than its share of truly awful gay vampire flesh eating low budget considerable violations of the film genre pieces of crapola, sometimes, "even a blind pig finds an acorn every now and then."
Consider this little jewel a humble acorn undeserved by Showtime.
This flick really works. I've done some time on the street, and have seen the interaction of morons with reality. One is left pondering that classic bit of wisdom, "The best laid plans of mice and men, often go astray..."
But, even if you are a loser, you have to play out your hand. What the arty fartsy French existentialists would term, "La condition humaine."
Extreme Prejudice (1987)
Great despite a few minor weaknesses!
SPOILERS! This film has a lot going for it. While limited in duration, this is my favorite Rip Torn role. His classic line:
"I always figured pigshit like you for pearly grips."
The love triangle between Nolte, Boothe, and Alonzo really works, very credible. And the film gets the weapons right, an oddity for Hollywood at that time.
Great performances by all. I am from Texas, and this film gets Texas right.
My biggest gripe is that the covert soldiers spend a lot of time talking about how great they are, which I don't think real soldiers would do. They would just demonstrate it. Some of that dialogue is over the top. Other than that, this film is solid gold all the way.
The "Wild Bunch" finale is an obvious homage, but I can live with that.
Lots of great one-liners.
The Rockford Files: Dirty Money, Black Light (1977)
One of the best episodes EVER!
This reran on a local indie station today, (Sept 26, 2006) and it brought back a lot of fine memories! Even though the basic plot premise was a little weak, stellar performances by Roger E. Mosley and Stuart Margolin really highlight a lot of fine writing! This is VINTAGE Rockford! Classic lines include: Even as Jim was telling his dad that Angel Martin knew to keep his mouth shut, Angel was spilling his guts to the feds "It was the ROCKFORD GANG! R O C K F O R D!" And Mosley's soliloquy as a loan shark, "You don't get no terms!" is one of the best in TV drama EVER! And Angel, ever in search of a free haircut, gets his in the end!
King Kong (2005)
Too long, too much FX!!!!!!!!!
I sometimes wish that every FX nerd in Hollywood would be taken out and shot! Films were MUCH better before we got into the whole FX for FX sake crap, what I call "relooping the dinosaurs." Problem is, FX are so expensive, you can't tell the suits you left any of it on the cutting room floor. That means you throw away your last chance to make a decent film.
If I ever sit through this turkey again, I'll go out and buy popcorn during the dinosaur damage sequence. It's like, WHO CARES? Car chase and FX, BORING! (Hint: how about plot, character motivation, you know, like script?) Actually, I really liked how much attention to detail was paid, like period ship, weapons, costumes, etc. It's just that after you've seen one dinosaur die, the rest are kinda boring.
The Mothman Prophecies (2002)
Not as good as it should have been!
This film has a lot going for it. Excellent premise, great production values, fine acting, and I love films set in small American towns! Also, the denouement is suitably dramatic and well done. (Though the big rescue is fairly cliché.) Yet, I still want MORE! It seems like the pacing, perhaps the editing, is a bit screwed up. Bottom line, we are left, at times, with Gere sitting in a motel room waiting for phone calls, which just doesn't get my motor revved. And the scary just ain't that scary.
The only excuse for this would be that they were sticking with the book, but other reviewers have pointed out that they didn't really stick with the book.
I'm glad I saw this film; it's just that it could have been a masterpiece.
The Twilight Zone: A World of His Own (1960)
One of the best TZ's!
This is clearly one of the best Twilight Zones! Many fiction writers report that their characters sometimes seem to adopt a will of their own and start going where the author never intended. This script simply takes this recognized phenomenon to the next level.
I generally would regard the deconstruction of Rod Serling at the end as a cheap trick, but it is not a cheap trick if you are the original! Something similar happens years later in "Blazing Saddles", where the story line "breaks out of the studio." I am always awed at how a story can get told with a few deft strokes in the thirty minutes less commercials format.
This episode is one of the best of the best!
The Day After (1983)
Some are in denial, I think
I have the $9.99 DVD of "The Day After", and watch it at least five times a year. Strangely, I tend to watch it up until the bombs go off, then quit watching.
Reading other posts, I see that I am not alone. But the difference is that, while I love the "run up" drama, I don't want to hang around for the misery. Others seem to attribute it to the last half of the film being "boring" or poorly made. I disagree. I think that they, like me, don't want to hang around for the misery. Like reading about a rape story, there no way to make it right, to make a happy ending.
Yet, sometimes I watch it all the way through. I lived through the Cold War, and was raised in Abilene, Texas, home of Dyess Air Force Base. Dyess AFB was a SAC base with nuclear armed B-52 bombers. I have read that it was assessed by the Soviets as one of the top twenty targets in the U.S.
Today, it is still of strategic importance.
A neighbor down the block had a prefab bomb shelter buried in the ground.
Growing up, I never worried that much, but it was always in the back of my mind.
I can't believe all the lame criticisms about "The Day After". Sure it is made for TV, on a low budget. Robards was excellent, as was the rest of the cast. But, I think the real problem her is denial.
The Survivors (1983)
Brilliant Comedy!
I can't BELIEVE that so many have given this a low rating! I guess that you have to be a member of the gun culture, (as I am), and understand all the inside jokes based on the clichés of the "debate" on guns to truly appreciate this film.
I love this film even though its message is ultimately anti-gun.
This is BRILLIANT writing, and solid casting! Endless great one-liners. Like; "I will not allow this man to dangle for your delight!" "Shoot for the boombox. Without music, they lose the will to fight!" "The root cause of crime, is CRIMINALS!" "It's great chicken, kid!" "Time out. I brought the wrong ammo!" And many others.
We got survival condos, a talking parrot, a hit man who gives cigarettes to trees! And more! I would honestly give this an eight instead of a ten, but wanted to up the average.
The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948)
A film that manages to find hope in the human condition amidst the most brutal reality
Just saw this AGAIN on Turner Classic Movies (August 5, 2006). For me this is a "benchmark" movie, by which, I mean a movie that you see several times over your lifetime, and each time you draw something new.
What is for me, currently most revelatory, is the essential humanity of the Huston character. He is wise, yet is willing to constantly retest his wisdom. He knows all the answers, yet still keeps his eyes open, searching for some thing new.
What is worthwhile is to compare this film with Sam Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch". So much of "The Wild Bunch" is derivative from "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre". Watch them back to back, and the commonalities will POP! A major strength of this film is its uncompromising realism. Nothing happens in this film that is not honest and plausible.
Also, seeing this movie would not be a bad idea for anyone seeking to invest in the stock market. The basic dynamics are pretty much the same.
This is a film that manages to find hope in the human condition amidst the most brutal reality.
Coogan's Bluff (1968)
Great early Eastwood!
POSSIBLE SPOILERS! While this is a period piece, that is one thing that makes it GREAT! It saves the 1968 New York hip scene on film!
Great supporting cast, Lee; J. Cobb, Don Stroud, and Susan Clark is HAWT! Tisha Sterling, the hippie chick, is PERFECT! While this movie inspired the Dennis Weaver as "McCloud" on TV, I wonder if this movie inspired "Crocodile Dundee" as well?
Great poolroom fight! And how do you like that crazy song in the dance club, "Pigeon-Toed Orange Peel"?
At July, 2006, this is only rated 6.5 I think that some of the lower ratings may be due to the fact that it may offend some feminist sensibilities. And it is not particularly politically correct to chain an American Indian to a post while you go inside enjoy a lady.
Hard to believe that this film is almost forty years old!
A Bridge Too Far (1977)
A solution looking for a problem.
The simple fact was that the Allied airborne divisions were, at this point in the war, a solution looking for a problem.
The airborne formations had been created at tremendous cost, and done excellent work to date. But they had drawn out a lot of the aggressive warriors from other military units, and now were sitting idle in England. Monty "thought up" a way to use them. Market-Garden was an abortion from the gitgo.
It is not for me to judge.
"A Bridge Too Far ' is an excellent film that helps preserve this military debacle for posterity.
Foreign Correspondent (1940)
Unheralded Hitickock GREAT!
INCLUDES POSSIBLE SPOILERS
I saw this on TV on Turner Classic Movies in July of 2006, and was unfortunately subjected to many interruptions, but managed to follow the plot line. I felt that the film may be overly long, but the constant interruptions that I had may have colored my judgment. At any rate, remember that in 1940 there was no television, life was slower paced, money paid for theater tickets was hard earned, and most theater goers would view a longer film as "getting their money's worth."
What I liked;
There were MANY excellent moments of humor! All the supporting cast kicked butt. While the film is not TOTALLY polished Hitchcock, there is MORE than enough of the "true geld" to make it a winner!
To reprise a few points MOSTLY already made by others:
Great scenes:
The building step assassination. The chase through the sea of umbrellas. The totally BRILLIANT windmill sequences! The chase out on the hotel ledge. The BRILLIANT final plane crash!
All of the cast were GREAT, see posts b previous posters for details.
One not mentioned yet, I think, was the brilliant small role by Eddie Conrad who plays, (as Edward Conrad) a unintelligible Latvian diplomat with a marvelously expressive face. He really scores when he sticks his head in the door of Carol's bedroom; sees McCrae in a dressing gown, AND HIS SMILE NEVER SHIFTS, but his eyes speak volumes!
"Foreign Correspondent" recalls a simpler day when foreign correspondents were unabashed agents of wartime propaganda; in fact, the film refers to them as "soldiers" in the opening captions, and trumpets their long ignored warnings of the coming conflict to a deluded public. (Opening captions made me think of William L. Shirer's book "Berlin Diary".) FC is reminiscent of "Casablanca", showing that a "propaganda film" can still be brilliant film making!
What is amazing is that this film was made in 1940, and Pearl Harbor was not until December 7, 1941. So Britain was at war when this film was released, but the United States was not. (Of course, Hitchcock was originally a British director.) While opinions may have been shifting, I think it was a bit of a gamble for Hitchcock to make such a blatant propaganda film in 1940 for U.S. release.
Some find the final propaganda radio broadcast from London being bombed as being over the top. But if you know your World War Two history, it was actually just the right note. The plane crash was a brilliant portrayal of the psychological transition of people still desperately trying to believe in peace now forced to accept the brutal reality of the total war that was now thrust upon them.
(Hitchcock has one of his signature "wicked moments" with the lady who vows to contact the "British Consulate" as soon as the Atlantic Clipper lands!)
Also, remember the precise nature of propaganda during the Second World War. To contemporary ears, it sounds like British and American people of that era were naive believers in some VERY cornball garbage. NOT at all! Propaganda was of TWO types. One was covert, intended to deceive. The second, and far more common type, was very open and straightforward, much like cheerleaders cheering for the home team. People loved it because it made them feel better. They knew it was VERY biased; hoping only that it was rooted in real facts, so far as possible. They knew that propaganda, just like tanks, bombers, aircraft carriers, and soldiers, is a vital weapon of war.
(In a recent PBS documentary of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, Goebbels OPENLY boasts in a public speech of the "superiority of Nazi propaganda".)
Actually, my only real criticism of the film is the title, "Foreign Correspondent". To me, that title is a VERY flat note to the contemporary ear, and probably why I gave it a pass for so many years. And I suspect, many others did as well. This film clearly belongs in the pantheon of Hitchcock's greats.
Red Dragon (2002)
Norton Sucks!
Remakes of GREAT films are always suspect, and I believed that "Manhunter" could never be topped. I still believe that, but found that this was very, very, good effort, except for total meltdown by Norton.
While Ed Norton has done excellent work in the past, he stumbles through this film like a zombie from "Plan 9 From Outer Space." He has ZERO charisma with his wife, a key plot ingredient. In "Manhunter" this was a very powerful plot stimulus.
. The early years of Lector were very effective. I gave this a five, not because it was so bad, but because it could have easily been so much better.
Norton sucks, everybody else GREAT!
No Mercy (1986)
Why Ratings So Low?
This is not one of my top 10 films of all times, but it is a solid genre piece with some interesting variations and local color.
After Katrina, a film about New Orleans has a special interest that adds a certain sauce.
If there are any weaknesses, some of Bassinger's line deliveries are a bit weak. Otherwise, superb acting all around. I have always thought Gere was something of a lightweight, but very solid work here.
Unlike many films, they get the weapons handling VERY right.
I am a bit confused as to why this film has been rated so low on average. I have the video, and watch it about once a year.
The Four Feathers (2002)
This version has many strengths, but at the end of the day, is inferior to the 1939 classic.
This version has many strengths, but at the end of the day, is inferior to the 1939 classic.
Believe me, I hoped the best for this film, I wanted it to kick butt, I wanted this story to be retold in our current era. But, its main fault is in "pacing". Errors in pacing are subjective, hence, hard to prove, but are none the less real. In the end, this means BORING.
They tried to introduce the "wog with the heart of gold", excellent acting there, but it meant a slowdown in the storytelling, back to BORING.
I was also peeved about "relieving General Gordon", while in the original tale, Khartoum had fallen ten years before. (Some of us DO take our history seriously.) Again, the fault is in pacing, hard to define, but there it is. Good editing probably would have saved this. It's kind of like hearing a joke where you have to hear the three false options that build up to the punchline. When poorly told, you are bored by options two and three, and impatient for the punchline.
I recently saw the 1939 version on Turner Classic Movies, and was EXTREMELY impressed with how fast the movie came to a close with tight crisp action. Also, INCREDIBLE on sight scenes in Egypt!
Munich (2005)
Dark and grim, but SUPERB movie making!
SPOILERS! I read the book decades ago, and have been muttering for years that this SHOULD be a movie. It is way cool that Spielberg brought this to this screen! The film pretty much sticks to the book, though it skips Avner's early Mossad recruitment and training to go straight to the action. Also, one other Israeli covert op that actually happened are added to the script, which enhance the storytelling.
While some Palistinian perspectives are given, and the commonality of mankind is stressed, there is also a strong message of the determination of the state of Israel to survive.
I am sure that some will disagree. I am not a Jew, but I think that this film presents certain realities that must be confronted. Every nation thinks it is morally superior to it's enemies, Israel probably more than most. But the simple fact is that certain things need to be done for survival. Those who have faced the elephant know that. Everybody else is just jerking off.
SPOILERS! Those who have read the book know that when Avner refused to return to "active duty", the Israeli government jerked all of the accumulated salary out of the bank account they had been "keeping for him". Spielberg chose not to include this detail.
This is a dark and grim movie, not entertainment, but it is my favorite Spielberg to date.
Invasion (2005)
What a CROCK!!!!!
What a CROCK!!!!! We have the usual tired old Hollywood metro-male script writer resentments of not getting Mary Lou because the real man jocks nailed her (and ALL of her sisters) on prom night.
So it is business as usual, revenge of the nerds, yadda yadda yadda, badda badda BING! Whatever, (just TOSS that worthless lotto ticket! And turn on the game! Here we have the three decades old politically correct stale plot where ALL white males are essentially clueless, and it is the intuitive little girl who knows what's actually going on! (How that is done without any black or Asian cast is the only, perhaps, residual mystery here1) Color me gone, adios muchachos. I'm a real UFO buff, but I can get a BIGGER THRILL watching old "Andy of Mayberry".
(See the original "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" with Kevin McCarthy! MUCH BETTER DONE!
Dog Soldiers (2002)
Excellent Work!
While I generally don't like the horror genre, I caught the last three fourths of "Dog Soldiers" on the SCI FI Channel and found it EXCELLENT! I had heard of it before, but was miffed at the theft of the title from the (non-horror) novel by Robert Stone, which was made into another excellent film, "Who'll stop the Rain", with Nick Nolte and Tuesday Weld.
While I am an American, I have trained with British infantry in Europe, and read a lot of their military literature since, and I really appreciate how hard the film makers worked to get the weapons, tactics, and British Army slang right. (I have a few quibbles on the weapons, but they are the sort that specialists LIVE to belabor at length. I the main, they got it right!) "Dog Soldiers" does what I wish EVERY horror or sci-fi film would do, which is, REALISTICALLY show how real soldiers would fare in encountering the an exotic foe, featuring real weapons and tactics. This is very good work! The beasts are truly frightful, but more important, this film has solid character development, and very solid story telling, ignored in too many films, regardless of budget.
There are no unwarranted surprises, there is subtle fore-shadowing of all that ensues.
Over time, I will find a good DVD copy of "Dog Soldiers" for my library.
Mystery Street (1950)
Very Solid Film Noir Work!
I would truthfully give this an 8 rather than a 10, but I feel the (at current 6.9) average is way too low.
It is not quite a classic, but has solid casting and performances all around, Montalban is excellent, and Elsa Lanchester truly inspired.
I was only familiar with Montalban's later work, and had him pegged as a Latin smoothie who just got by on his charm. I found myself saying again and again, "this guy really CAN act!" (Montalban actually got better looking the older he got.) Excellent photography and Boston locales. SPOILERS! The last chase through the train yard has been endlessly duplicated, and I'm not for certain that it is original in this film.
A MUST SEEE for every noir buff!
War of the Worlds (2005)
An Eight Rather than a Ten , due to Lame Dork Political Correctness
As with ANY slime infesting Hollywood, Spielburg is genetically challenged, incapable of rendering any "survivalist", AKA, the Tim Robbins character, as anything other than a psycho.
As with ANY slime infesting Hollywood, Spielberg is genetically challenged, incapable of rendering any "survivalist", AKA, the Tim Robbins character, as anything other than a psycho.
OK, so Spielberg earns his union card, (and a continued invite to Barbra's garden parties),
otherwise, solid film-making.
But I still have to ask, why don't these Hollywood dweebs have any balls? Pretty much vintage War of the Worlds, Excellent storytelling, verisimilitude, It will earn buckets of cash, And deserves to.
As for New Jersey, The Supreme Court has recently ruled it legal for private investors to steal private property to level urban blight, Why should we complain if aliens from outer space, Are willing to do it for free?
UFO's Are Real (1979)
Excellent Work!
Frankly, I was surprised to find such extremely LIMITED commentary on this film! I'd RATHER have extensive ADVERSE judgements, rather than such a big SNORE! I guess that this film is basically, "pre-Internet", hence, lacks the "big review" number of responses! Based upon my "to date" research, I have garnered a lot of respect for Stanton Friedman, and know he DESERVES a much larger VOTE, regardless of whether UP or DOWN.
As far as I can tell, this is something of a "masterwork" for Friedman, and, within the limitations of the UFO format, a brilliant execution! Interest in UFO's seems to come and go in "waves".
Hence, two things I know for sure. First, we seem to be at the bottom of the current cycle, in terms of interest by the American public.
Two, it will take only a a "slight nudge", to rocket this topic back to, "the top of the charts."
The Incredibles (2004)
What A Gobbler!
I was trapped at a family gathering and forced to sit through this turkey, or else insult my host! Who can I send a bill to at Disney to get my time back? Plot TOTALLY predictable, I could tell you which movie EVERY SCENE was ripped off from, same for the music, no chance passed over to make some politically correct, feminist, Dad is a moron little message.
WAY too long! I don't think I'll ever watch another Disney movie again.
I don't know of any kids who are stupid enough to enjoy this loser!
I don't care about special effects, I've got to have a STORY!
Why doesn't Hollywood believe in hiring real writers anymore?
Save this one for Thanksgiving dinner!
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
I could point out a few plot foibles, but, basically a BIG thumbs up!
I could point out a few plot foibles, but, basically a BIG thumbs up! Great special effects, but FAR MORE important, a cogent STORY line!!!!!! (Ridley Scott! Read 'em and WEEP!!!! Write a story, dude, if you want skittles with your beer.) I am very glad to see the STAR WARS Series go out with a BIG BANG!!!!! The plot is essentially Christian in Inspiration, but a FEW apostate malingering creep in, such as, "only a Sith believes in absolutes".
Hokay, a few token bows to blue state dweebs.
But in the end, this is REAL MEAT for REAL WARRIORS! I repeat, A BIG THUMBS UP!
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)
Great action, but pretty much another Hollywood politically correct snow job.
WARNING: SPOILERS!!!! Naturally, any Europeans who actually believe in Christ are portrayed as bloodthirsty, stupid morons, and no priest is shown who is not venal craven, and cowardly. As a Protestant, I normally don't worry overmuch about insulting portrayals of Catholic clergy, but a modest respect for common sense suggests that they may have been at least a few Godly men in their ranks.
The Muslims of course, are possessed of great subtlety and charm. The "good" knights of course, are pretty much Hollywood liberals, dealing with their usual inchoate longings.
SPOILER: Not to deny that The Muslim leader Saladin was truly remarkable talented, man, but the end of the siege of Jerusalem shows Saladin giving free passage to all the defenders, certainly a magnanimous gesture.
What Ridley Scott and the scriptwriters fail to divulge, is the historical fact that only those who could pay a ransom were set free. The ransom was ten sovereigns for a man, five for a woman, and one for a child. Those who could not pay, about 14,000 in all, were sold into slavery. (Source: "Chronicles of the Crusades", edited by Elizabeth Hallam.) Historical facts can be SO embarrassing! I had very high hopes for this film, as I think a decent film about the Crusades is long overdue. Actually, I recommend that people should see this film. There are superb action scenes. Viewers should be warned that this film is three hours long, much of it devoted to setting the precise Hollywood liberal nuance, through ENDLESS talking scenes. I personally wasn't THAT bored, but do warn prospective viewers. But in the end unfortunately, this film is the usual Hollywood bashing of Christians who ACTUALLY believe.
And, ALL FILM MAKERS LISTEN UP! Why not take one percent of the cash you waste on special effects, and use it to hire a writer? That's only about two percent fewer orcs, nobody will notice.
Every film needs a real storyline.