Change Your Image
pioneerstkd
Reviews
The Best Man (2023)
Dolph mails one in.
An interesting premise; rich daddy rents an entire mountain resort for his daughter's wedding, terrorists show up, mayhem ensues, is pretty much wasted with bland acting (by the men), hysteria (by the women), plot holes you could drive a truck through and fight sequences which purport to have actors playing highly-trained special ops vets but there's no doubt they're actors. As for Dolph Lundgren, in his prime he could've handled the entire invading force by himself, and even at 65 he should've been able to take out at least half of them alone. One has to wonder if the "liquor" he was drinking was real.
1923: Nothing Left to Lose (2023)
Classic romance carries the show
Spencer and Alexandra's romance is the best I've ever seen portrayed on screen, large or small. It has everything: exotic locales, danger, adventure, two people without love in their lives who suddenly, unexpectedly find it. They have to defy rigid social mores, attacks by wild animals, a shipwreck, a challenge from Alex's ex-fiance that is a no-win situation for Spencer, and yet he does not flinch from it. Brilliant directing, acting, cinematography, costuming, and especially writing sweep the viewer into the story. Who cares what's happening in Montana? The second season can't come soon enough.
In the Blood (2014)
Lots of potential for this actress and director
Gina Carano expands her acting chops and showcases her fighting skills in "In the Blood". Despite some uneven plotting, the fight scenes and top-notch cinematography overcome that. Having traveled extensively in the Caribbean, I can tell you that the movie perfectly captures the feel of the islands; you can go from idyllic vacation spot to gritty third-world surroundings in minutes. Some reviewers compare the movie to "Taken", but really, that never occurred to me while I was watching "In the Blood". The biggest difference is that in the Liam Neeson movie, we know very quickly why his daughter has been kidnapped; with "In the Blood", we have no idea what has happened to Ava's husband once the paramedics hustle him away in their ambulance. This can be viewed as a weakness or perhaps a strength: What happened to this guy? Who's crooked? Who can Ava trust? Overall, Carano's acting takes a big leap in this picture, compared to her debut in "Haywire", in which her fighting skills clearly overshadowed her acting. She has great potential to be the action-movie heroine of the next decade.
Grumpy Old Men (1993)
Old pros at work
Back in the '90s, I worked as a radio announcer in a small northern WI town. My wife operated a travel agency. Once a year we would host a bus tour, usually to Branson, Mo. Around '95 or so we were going over what movies we would show on the bus on the ride down. We debated over "Grumpy Old Men", wondering how our audience (mostly seniors) would react. We decided to give it a shot.
They were laughing so hard I started to fear we would have several cardiac arrests. Years later we would run into some of them and they would bring up that movie. It was a good choice.
Even though it's 20 years old now, the film holds up very well. Just goes to show you what veteran actors with great chemistry can do on-screen, especially with a terrific script, deft directing and location photography.
Full Metal Jacket (1987)
Anti-war, anti-military, but Ermey's great
When "Full Metal Jacket" premiered in 1987 we were only 12 years removed from Vietnam and still 14 years from the 9/11 attacks. I would submit that the public's views on Vietnam have changed since Kubrick made his film. Many Vietnam vets are now retiring and in recent years have finally been getting recognition for their service. The public's current determination to support the troops "downrange", fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, is a reflection of the shame we feel for the way we treated Vietnam vets back during their war. Even those who bitterly oppose the current war are quick to say they still support the troops---which to me his hypocritical, because how can you support people who are doing something you despise?
I bought the movie after my brother linked me to a YouTube cut of the opening scene in the barracks where the gunny dresses down the "maggots". A fan of Gunny Ermey, I enjoyed his performance, but from what I know of today's recruit training from TV documentaries and talks with current troops, many of Sgt. Hartman's methods would never be allowed in today's Marine Corps or other services. The training is tough and demanding and it must be so, because on the battlefield there is no room for sissies or cowards and attention to detail and willingness to follow orders are often life-or-death matters. Discipline is a must in a military unit and very few of today's young people, or those from any era, who enter the military have much in the way of self-discipline.
The second half of the movie, depicting the Marines in Vietnam during Tet, has anti-war imagery that is almost too obvious. The Marines are now shown to be less than orderly in their discipline and sometimes close to being psychotic. They have little or no regard for the Vietnamese people and have no compunction about "wasting" civilians. The only Marine who shows empathy for the natives is Joker, who conspicuously wears a peace button in violation of direct orders from his superiors (and is apparently never reprimanded). The South Vietnamese culture is depicted as corrupt, as the only South Vietnamese we meet are thieves, pimps and prostitutes. By contrast, the only North Vietnamese soldier we see is a teenage girl, who prays as she is dying, something no American is shown doing. (How can she be a loyal communist and still be religious?) The message is clear: the communists were noble patriots seeking to overthrow the corrupt Saigon regime which was being propped up by the imperialist Americans. Yes, there is the scene of Joker and Rafterman at the mass grave of South Vietnamese who have been murdered by the NVA, but the impact of the scene is lessened---indeed, its message completely turned around---when the officer describing the atrocity continually smiles for the camera and then the colonel upbraids Joker for wearing the peace button. What kind of message would Kubrick have sent had he shown the officer weeping as he described the murders, or had the angry colonel rip the button off Joker's vest and toss it into the grave, saying something like, "These people could've used your (expletive) button, Marine. Then the peace-loving freedom-fighters would've left them alone, wouldn't they?"
It's been said that historical perspective about an event or era can only be achieved some fifty years after the fact, especially once many or most of the principals have died and so more objective accounts of their lives and contributions can be written. Now some 35 years after the end of our Vietnam involvement, we are beginning to see some of this.
The Tet Offensive, launched by the NVA and VC during the holiday truce, was a sign of things to come; after all, Hanoi blithely ignored the Paris accords once their own military and infrastructure had sufficiently recovered from the pounding it received from us in the early '70s and Nixon, who had no qualms about sending armadas of B-52s over the North, was out of office.
Kubrick was undoubtedly a good filmmaker, but his films seemed often to be almost too cerebral for the average viewer, visually stunning but conceptually muddled. At least to those of us here in the heartland; it's not surprising that the critics who live on the enlightened coasts loved him so much.