Change Your Image
wj2007
Reviews
Take the Money and Run (1969)
Not all that funny
I saw this movie when it first came out more than fifty years ago. I just saw it again. Frankly I was quite disappointed. Basically it simply is not all that funny.
IMHO save for this being the first film Woody Allen wrote, directed, and starred in, there is almost no reason to watch this film. It is of interest purely for historical reasons, e.g., you may want to see Woody Allen at a time when he actually still had some real hair, and you may want to see the first on screen version of Woody Allen as a an archetypal nebish. However beyond that, the film simply is a forgettable, boring, waste of time.
My recommendation is that if you want to see the early Woody Allen, watch Bananas, Sleeper, Play It Again Sam, and especially Anne Hall. Those are the movies which marked the real start of his film career.
The Greatest Show on Earth (1952)
A nice piece of Americana
In some respects, this movie does not age well. Yes, it was the highest grossing film of 1952 and yes it did win the Oscar for Best Picture. And several of the cast of wonderful. Frankly given current tastes, the movie can easily be somewhat boring. The story line is rather thin and largely predicable.
And yet ...
In other respects, this movie is a wonderful piece of Americana. It depicts an American institution - the three ring big top circus with animal acts and glitz - that is no more. It gives you a feel for what the American circus must have been like in the early and middle 20th century and what the performers must have been like. Nothing like this now exists. For that alone, it is worth watching.
So I am glad that I had the opportunity to see this film, though I doubt that I will ever do so again.
In a Lonely Place (1950)
Disappointing
Based on recent discussions praising this movie, I saw it this week. I had been looking forward to a compelling film noir. Alas, the movie just never grabbed me.
Over the years I have seen most of the great film noir movies and have repeatedly seen Humphrey Bogart's great classic films. Indisputably he was one of the great classic American film actors. Alas this film simply was not convincing. The plot was a bit shallow. The interior stage sets looked cheap. The finale did not impress me. Sorry to say, it just did not really work.
For me the best part of the film were the numerous exterior shots of then contemporary Los Angeles. As an Angeleno, I recognized many of the locations even after decades.
Im Westen nichts Neues (2022)
Changes in story which diminshed the movie
There are at least three significant changes between Remarque's stellar novel and Berger's movie. Sadly each of these changes alter Remarque's vision and diminish the resulting film.
(1) Remarque's novel is totally focused on WW I as experienced by a German foot soldier on the Western front. This movie adds a subplot depicting the Armistice negotiations and the German military's resistance to accepting the armistice. Not only does this subplot detract from Remarque's vision, but the subplot distorts the actual history of the negotiations, depicting the key civilian negotiator as a Social Democrat. In fact, Matthias Erzberger was a leader of the Catholic Center Party.
(2) The movie ends with a completely hopeless, pointless battle just before the Armistice takes effect. This is not in Remarque. I do not believe that any such battle took place. In fact, in the last days of the war, both the German Navy and Army were mutinying. When the Kiel fleet was ordered to confront the British fleet, the sailors rebelled, seized their ships, and refused to leave port. In the movie, the troops know that there is no reason to fight a battle minutes before the Armistice will begin. Given what was actually happening at the time elsewhere in Germany, these soldiers probably would not have gone into battle but instead might well have shot their officers.
(3) The movie omits a key part of Remarque's story, Paul's visit home. Paul is so horrified by the disconnect between his life at the front and the civilian failure to understand the horrors of the war, that as he returns to his unit he feels that ought never to have left the front.
Again, each of these changes is unfortunate and reduced my rating for this film.
Il conformista (1970)
Disappointing
Despite the wide praise for this film, I did not find it to be as good as many critics judge it to be. Bertolucci's film simply failed to engage me as I had hoped.
At the very least, anyone watching this film ought first to read the Wikipedia summary of the novel, The Conformist. It will help you understand what is happening. However be warned: The film omits various key plot points in the novel and changes the novel ending. Only after I read this Wikipedia summary of the novel did I understand various parts of the film.
Also a warning: Though I am not Italian I have a reasonably good knowledge of the history of Italian Fascism. So I understood the film's historical references. If you lack such a background, I doubt that the basic plot will even be intelligible to you. For such people, a review of Italian history in Wikipedia probably is a good idea.
Us (2019)
Almost unwatchable
After watching Peele's interesting "Get Out" I thought to see his "Us." Sadly I felt "Us" to be almost unwatchable. Perhaps it is better than a Zombie movie but not by much. The film has a lot of violence and gore apparently signifying nothing. Near the end there is an effort at an explanation. Alas, it was completely unconvincing, leaving me feeling that I wasted two hours of my life. If there is supposed to be some significant message here, I do not know what it is.
Loin des hommes (2014)
Excellent Depiction Of Colonialism And Its Moral Dilemmas
"Far From Men" is a very nice film based on Albert Camus' 1957 short story "The Guest." The movie excellently captures the conflicts inherent in colonial Algeria. It is well worth watching.
The story is set in 1954, just as the Algerian independence struggle is beginning. The two main characters are a well-meaning teacher, an Algerian of European descent for whom French Algeria is his native land (played by Viggo Mortensen), and an Arab Algerian living in a traditional tribal society (played by Reda Ketab). The Arab has murdered a cousin for theft. The teacher, contrary to his wishes, is tasked to escort the Arab to the police. Their tale plays out among colonialist French Algerian vigilantes, a band of FLN fighters, a troop of French soldiers, and some Algerian European colonial civilians.
The film happens against the background of the nascent independence struggle. It shows people's moral conflicts and critical, often life and death, decisions. It nicely depicts how colonialism affects everyone living in Algeria, even those who would prefer not to take sides.
The cinematography superbly captures the incredible harsh beauty of the arid, barren Atlas mountain landscape as well as the appalling living conditions of the Arab Algerians. Seeing this film, I felt that I really was in impoverished rural colonial Algeria.
Two important points worth noting for those familiar with "The Guest":
(1) While most of the events and secondary characters in the movie are spot on depictions of the 1954 Algerian context, they are not in Camus' original story, and
(2) The film's ending differs from that of Camus' short story.
Still, again, I recommend this film.
Giv'a 24 Eina Ona (1955)
Restored Version
Many of the lower rated reviews are based on old poor quality prints. If you plan to see this movie, you must watch it in a restored print such as the high resolution Turner Classic Movie version available on YouTube.
Les misérables (2019)
Impressive, but ending not credible
The first 90 minutes of this film is a quite impressive multiple viewpoint drama showing the difficult interactions in a rundown Paris immigrant neighborhood between an ethically challenged three member police unit, the impoverished immigrant residents (largely Moslem and African), and assorted adolescents. The presentation is quite realistic. I was moved.
If the movie had ended there, I might rate it a 9. Unfortunately it did not. Instead the film is marred by its violent not credible ending. Hence my rating of 7.
On one day, while investigating a case concerning the theft of a lion cub, the three policemen are set upon by the adolescent thief's teen age friends. The children threaten the police. They throw rocks. The police overreact, seriously injuring the thief as he tries to escape. Various consequences ensue, but in the end a level of calm is apparently restored.
Alas, in revenge the next day the three police and several other adults are ambushed by a highly organized gang of young men wearing black hoodies. Garbage cans and shopping carts are thrown at the police down flights of stairs. Flares and fireworks are shot at the police. The police behave stupidly. Rather than wait for back-up, they put themselves into a situation of extreme life-threatening danger. The adolescents, instead of behaving as a disorganized gang of delinquents, suddenly show an almost military level of tactics and organization and a lethal rage.
Frightening and as disturbing as this violence is, intellectually I simply could not buy into it. Sorry, but a group of socially marginalized boys cannot be transformed in a single day into an almost military level combat unit.
Uncut Gems (2019)
Total Dreck
This is one of the most appallingly bad movies that I have ever seen. It is a complete disaster. AVOID THIS FILM.
The movie concerns a New York City jeweler named Howard Ratner (played by Adam Sandler) whose life is falling apart. Ratner is self-destructive. He lies. He gambles. He cheats on his wife and his marriage is falling apart. He exploits people. Other people exploit him. Many of the other characters with whom he interacts are amoral low life types (e.g., loan sharks, muscle men, and a bookie). His behavior is horrific.
The plot is an unconvincing series of difficulties one stupidly following another. In fact, instead of a real plot, it is as if we get the same scene over and over as Ratner (Sandler) repeatedly behaves in stupid self-destructive ways. The acting is problematic, with scene after scene of actors simply shouting and loudly cursing at one another at the same time.
Nothing that I saw in the first hour of the movie me gave me any desire to see more. None of the characters were minimally interesting or emotionally involving (least of all Ratner (Sandler)). Do such people exist and do some people behave in this way? Yes, of course they do. I am not an innocent. However I do not enjoy seeing such unfortunates pointlessly portrayed on the screen.
And so - and this is the first time in thirty years that I have done this - I got up, left, and asked that my ticket be refunded, It was.
The Good Liar (2019)
A waste of two great performers
I really wanted to like this movie. Sadly I was significantly disappointed. While Ian McKellan and Helen Mirren are as wonderful as one could hope, their performances are wasted on a rather contrived, quite convoluted script. In the end, I simply did not find the intricate plot to be credible. Worst, many key plot twists were verbally explained rather than acted. Sorry, but this movie simply was not a good use of such fine talent.
Chasing Einstein (2019)
A movie about physicists, not physics
Be warned. While it was somewhat interesting, anyone considering watching it should know that the movie really is about a number of prominent physicists (and one physics interested entrepreneur), not about the physics in which they are engaged.
The focus is on the motivations and lives of a few very bright people who have devoted years of their lives to exploring dark matter. Unfortunately the movie provides almost no explanation of why it is that physicists believe that there is such a thing or even a minimally adequate brief discussion of the possible alternative candidate hypotheses, thereby leaving viewers with fragmentary understandings of the very people upon whom the film focuses.
To use just one example, the reason why current physicists are confronted with the problem of dark matter is due to the work of Vera Rubin. No discussion of her work on the rotation of stars around galaxies is provided. There is no discussion of why, e.g., WIMPs (Weak Interactive Massive Particles) or modifications to gravity in certain situations, would explain the apparent 'missing' matter.
In short, while it is interesting to see dedicated people working for years risking great disappointment, if you do not understand the subject matter when you go into the movie, that is the way in which you will be when you leave the film.
P.S. One curious unexplained part of the film is the appearance of a Silicon Valley millionaire (I believe that it is Cree Edwards) hosting some of the physicists. As this man contributes little to the movie itself, I could not help but wonder whether he had financed this movie as a vanity project. Does anyone know?
Vision - Aus dem Leben der Hildegard von Bingen (2009)
A disappointment
This movie was a disappointment. The viewer coming to the film without a knowledge of who Hildegard of Bingen was and her significance is likely to leave the movie in almost the same condition. Why nine hundred years after her life is she still discussed? This movie will not answer that question.
The plot is minimal and predictable. It tells the story of Hildegard's becoming a nun, becoming the head of her group of sisters, starting her own nunnery, her conflicts with male authorities, and her relations with political authorities. At least as presented in Vision, this is not riveting. Neither the photography nor the acting is very impressive.
While the movie alludes to Hildegard's musical works, her scientific and medical interests, and devotes time to her visions, we do not receive a coherent well developed picture of the woman and her accomplishments. And that is a disappointment since Hildegard was an interesting person.
In short, Hildegard the person simply is not the same as Vision the movie. A movie reviewer ought not to confuse the two.
To cite just two points on which a more enterprising film might have focused:
(1) For all of the movie's talk of Hildegard's visions, no effort is made to present them visually. That could have been quite dramatic cinema. Even if the budget constrained dramatic staging of the visions, a skillful writer would have used a plot device (such as manuscript illuminations or wall paintings) for graphic effect. It would have provided us with some feel as to their power and impact on her contemporaries. Alas, instead the movie has Hildegard narrating small disconnected passages without any real vitality.
(2) The movie ends just as Hildegard is going out to preach. She made four such trips and apparently they had major impacts throughout the Rhineland. Yet we do not see those trips. Undoubtedly they could have been presented in very dramatic fashion. Alas again, the movie misses a great cinematic opportunity.
One final point before closing. Yes, Hildegard is a strong woman resisting domination by male Church leaders, a creative artist, and an interesting intellectual figure. Unfortunately her legacy is not wholly uncontroversial. Some of her visions are profoundly anti-semitic. During the Second Crusade of 1147, the Jewish communities of the Rhineland were massacred. While Bernard denounced these mobs, Hildegard was silent. Wouldn't a more balanced picture of Hildegard have shown these moral failures? It might have made for a more interesting movie.
Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007)
Disappointment
The cast is wonderful, some of the scenes are well done, but alas, the movie takes significant liberties with history and leaves out some of the most dramatic pieces of the story.
I find it incomprehensible how anyone could make a movie dealing with Elizabeth and the defeat of the Armada and omit the core of her famous speech to the English army at Tilbury, namely the line "I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a King, and of a King of England too!" Everyone familiar with the story is sitting waiting for Elizabeth to deliver that line, one of the greatest inspirational speeches in British history. It ought be the dramatic highlight of the movie. However, alas, it is not there. How can a screen writer not use such material?
Perhaps as bad is the role that the movie assigns Raleigh in the defeat of the Spanish Armada. During the entire fight up the Channel, Raleigh was never at sea. His responsibilities were on the land, defending the coast of Devonshire. Placing him on a fire ship targeted at the anchored Spanish fleet is the purist fiction.
Other lesser omissions and errors could also be cited. The result is to leave this viewer disappointed.
Chûshingura (1962)
Disappointing
The tale of the 47 ronin is one of the great Japanese tales, forming one of the central traditional bases of the national character. It concerns an actual historical incident that occurred in 1701 to 1703. For three centuries the story has been taught to school children. It teaches the values of loyalty, self-sacrifice, honor, and integrity, even in the face of certain death. Those not familiar with the story can find numerous accounts on the web (e.g., on Wikipedia).
Sadly this movie version is a disappointment. It simply does not really engage the viewer. Many key points of the story are omitted, even though the movie is 209 minutes! If I did not already know the tale from other sources, I would have had difficulty understanding the context or significance of much of the action. This great epic deserves much better.
La meglio gioventù (2003)
Not quite as thrilled as I had hoped
Over the last two weeks I watched the six hours of the American release DVDs. Given some of the things that I had heard about this film, I was expecting much more. Alas, on key points I was less than overwhelmed. At least in the American six hour version there are several discontinuities and unexplained points that detract from the overall effect.
To cite one example: Initially both Giulia and Nicola support the student demonstrations. Yet as the story continues, Nicola focuses on his psychiatric career and their daughter, while Giulia abandons her music and turns away from them to go underground as a revolutionary. Why? Without offering an explanation, we are left wondering why her entire life took such a trajectory.
Is this an issue in the full length original or just in the six hour version?
Still, the movie was fairly nice. It was just not as powerful as I had hoped.