Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Rawhide: Incident at Deadhorse: Part II (1964)
Just A Coincidence I'm sure ( or not!)
As the 2nd part episode concludes, the hangman (Burgess Meredith in all his stately charicatureness) slowly rides out of town on a whitish horse, a townsperson says Behold a rider on a Pale Horse and his name is death. And Clint Eastwood as Rowdy Yates also rides out of town in the other direction. I'm pretty sure I saw another episode of Rawhide where the Pale Horse and rider motif was also used and stated similarly. Just a coincidence Eastwood used this allusion specificallly in at least two of his later movies and of course most of his other oaters? I would think not. An Ok two parter enhanced by Meredith (above), Broderick Crawford, and Chill Wills, three larger than life character actors of the 50s and 60s and a few other lesser known but still recognizable actors as walkons.
The Great Morgan (1946)
Not that bad first attempt of a new genre.
I'm not one of those intense movie aficionados, someone who has seen like 90+% of every movie made, and know more about movies than producers, directors, actors, etc. but I have seen a lot of different movies and remember most of them. I watched this movie on TCM the other night and immediately realized it was a first attempt at the genre of movies that include Amazon Women on the Moon, Kentucky Fried Movie, the Groove Tube, and others. This had that same kind of offbeat humor - a satire that parodies how old time stuidios work. And it had enough character actors such as Ben Blue, Arthur Space and others to make it interesting to those who look for bits of Hollywood history (besides introducing to the audience real backstage talents of the golden age of movies).. The plot is threadbare, the acting is almost amateurish, but the end result is, if you like that kind of humor, mildly enjoyable. A 1 star by itself, a 6 star if you appreciate this kind of humor and see it as the first of a new genre.
American Hustle (2013)
An Enjoyable Evening of Entertainment that requires one to think
I just saw this movie tonight and I found it very enjoyable. I knew it was about people playing con games, and from the one or two previews I saw, I suspected it was sort of an updated version of The Sting, which was a movie that required the viewer if he/she really wanted to enjoy it, to actually think about it. I spent most the movie trying to figure out who was hustling who and how far would each go. I knew specifically that Bradley Cooper, Amy Adams, and Jennifer Lawrence were in it, but I didn't think about Christian Bale until about 15 minutes into the movie, that's how well into his role he was. He reminded me of a few other actors who with the right makeup and wardrobe sort of look like that, Paul Rudd for one. I found Jennifer Lawrence's character to be highly enjoyable. I was also very appreciative to see both Jack Jones and Anthony Zerbe having small roles in this movie as the major part of their careers took place in this era. It added a sense of understanding by the director/producers to the movie, to reach out to an audience who lived through it. A couple of drawbacks, Amy Adams hair was not 70/80's in the least except for one scene. The movie was probably about 20 minutes too long and some of the flashbacks (partial spoiler) such as the one where Bradley Cooper actually beat up his boss, could have easily been deleted. It added nothing to the movie except time. I will probably see it several times when it comes to cable. My wife and our friends also enjoyed it.
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
Good Views, and Characterizations, Typical Jacksonesque Storyline
I pretty much have the entire story in memory, as it was the first of Tolkien's stories that I read,and enjoying it immensely, I've reread it numerous times. I'm also old enough to know that any movie adaptation is very unlikely to follow the original to the letter, so I was not expecting a word for word retelling. I also know that Peter Jackson likes to take wide liberties with original story lines (for what reason I'm not sure, I guess to please himself). Anyway, I saw the movie over the Christmas holidays in 3D IMAX but was not able to see it in 48fps to see if that was interesting. I enjoyed the story being told, but I was totally unimpressed by both the 3D and IMAX. Neither added a thing to the story. I was in the exact center about 7 rows up from the side to side aisle (about 15 rows back from the screen) and my glasses pretty much filled in from both sides. Some 3D was interesting but the 10 or 15 truly 3D moments were not effective in the least. Nor was the IMAX. Big screen, yes, effective, no.
Now the story. I thought the dwarfs that were allowed speaking lines were well portrayed, but Bomber for instance was just 'there'. We needed to meet them all, not just see the 'fat' one, for example. Only about 5 got good parts, Fili and Kili our Legolas stand-ins, Thorin, the old geezer, and maybe one or two others. Thorin is just a little too dignified for me. The original story was they were going to break into the dragon's lair and steal something little!!! (at best, the Arkenstone, just to show that they could do it). In this version, 13 dwarfs are going to reclaim the entire kingdom where before the dragon wiped out a huge dwarven army, but this time they have a burglar with them. Yeah. Sorry, doesn't hold up. The book Thorin was pretty much a jerk throughout, and at almost the end (spoiler) he was a real jerk. It's going to be hard expecting him to turn into one, as he's the Aragorn stand-in for the brooding, intense, but basically decent king without a throne.
I didn't mind Radagast tho he was made to look extremely foolish way too much (I could have done without the eyes crossing every other minute, and now that I think about it, his riding around on that rabbit sled reminds me of one of the early characters in Neverending Story, the overly dressed little person on his racing snail, just as silly looking), Saruman was almost in his late LOTR mode which means for the next 60 Middle-earth years, he was going to be a continual party-pooper (almost like he knew the Ring would be available very soon - nobody did at that moment. Maybe he already had the palantir and the 'necromancer' was using him already – not in the real story, but you know PJ).
The mini-White Council was OK and I thought Elrond was portrayed really well. The goblin King was as hideous as the original story made him out. Gollum was good, the continuing villain of Azog/Bolg was one of Jackson's unneeded characters, as the wild wolves would have been more than enough. The trolls were actually about what I expected, tho Bilbo's burglarizing was played down, and Gandalf's power was played up a little too much. The stone giants were well done if just a little over done, a few minutes less would have been just fine. Galadriel was OK. Gandalf was just like I expected. And Martin Freeman as Bilbo, I thought did a decent job of slowly moving from prim home-bodied Hobbit, to give more than a glimmer that he could think on his own. He just didn't start out as home-dwelling as the book Bilbo did, so his 'growth was a little more than I was expecting but it was fine although I'm not sure I can see Ian Holm coming out of that portrayal. At least this Bilbo wasn't portrayed as some 16 year old.
I wish more elves had been singing, Rivendell should have been still awash in elves at this time, but since it wasn't, it's going to be hard to have Elrond/them show up in the last act as some kind of cavalry (spoiler, he didn't in the book, but I expect him to because Jackson likes heavy handed presaging and Elrond on horseback looked dashing) . Speaking of which, the woodland King on his stag was sort of silly looking as was the extreme vegan diet of the elves. The dwarfs would have known about it and not acted surprised at lettuce leaves on the plate if it were true, (and you'd think the Elves as hosts would know the dietary desires of the dwarfs, but that's Jackson again) There are any number of text references to elves having feasts that include meat at times, and there would be a load of bread.
So, okay, I liked the movie as I thought the sets especially did a good job portraying the countryside between Bilbo's home and the other side of the Misty Mountains. The characterizations if not 'factual' were at least interesting, and the story line is staying as close as I had hoped. I'll be awaiting part 2, especially to see Orlando Bloom's role. I'd be more interested to see Strider the Ranger wander into a scene or two and then disappear. At least that would make just as much sense.
Snow Job (1972)
Not a great movie, but enjoyable for ski fanatics
I saw this movie when it first came out and again about 20 or more years later on satellite. My impressions changed little. Basically, it's a heist movie with novice thieves involved. Cliff Potts is a down on his luck American about to give skiing in Europe up, Jean Claude is the skiing (I think an instructor, too) son of a big time power player in Europe. The father thinks little of his son's abilities. There's a young woman involved also (I believe she was Killy's current girlfriend in RL).
Killy's character gets the 3 together and proposes ripping off a ritzy ski area at the end of the holiday season when there's a lot of cash floating around. He convinces the others to join him and they do. Part of the plot is to get the cash to Killy who will ski some impossible terrain to stash the money, thus convincing authorities that the money must be elsewhere, especially when they decide not to run for it until it's quiet again, thus throwing more suspicion away from them.
---ok, this isn't a full spoiler, you'll see why when you read on, and I won't give away the ending, but it's more than the other two reviews ------
They succeed and congratulate themselves on their success,planning to wait out the investigation when all of a sudden, an insurance investigator shows up and begins sniffing around.
This is the real plot of the movie - will he find them out, how will they handle someone who may be as smart or smarter than they are.
The ending is not what you would expect in the least - unless you can make some very good, unsupportable with no hard facts assumptions, that are eventually made evident. This was a small saving grace for the low level acting.
It's obvious Killy has his moments on skis, which is what most of the viewers were waiting for. Cliff Potts shows up occasionally in other movies of this era, but was quickly forgotten. A nice ski movie, but not quite in the same league as 'Downhill Racer' with Redford and Hackman.
Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970)
More of a warning about possibilities, but not a prediction
I saw this movie when in came out in 1970 while I was stationed in the USAF in Alaska. Computers were just up and coming and the idea of miniaturization had not yet taken hold. From that aspect, this movie holds up well, as we would assume that it would take a very large computer to handle all the information of the military defense of the United States.
It does require some assumptions - the military mostly agreed to be put under one command (a BIG assumption here), the system was tested prior to launch (no reason why it shouldn't have been, and no reason to show us in detail, either). The system could monitor enough of the world to keep track of everything important - like the movie 'Eagle Eye' or the story, 'The Adolescence of P1'.
Science fiction is a broad term and I happen to really enjoy one sub-genre, where the story takes one technological impossibility (or highly implausible concept - ignoring my first assumption above!), allows it to happen and investigates what it might mean and what might result. Here, the story is investigating run away artificial intelligence. The basic premise of the story is that Dr. Forbin, being the foremost computer expert, has created an 'intelligence' that can make independent rational decisions about military defense and put them into operation if need be. He just didn't expect the machine to begin thinking long term as well as searching out and resolving the underlying causes of why it is there.
In this case, the good doctor embedded the machine with what he assumed was the capability to choose rational options. The problem with that is that as humans, we also let emotions enter into our decision making process. The aversion to the needless taking of lives is a case in point. If the machine has not been taught the difference between taking a life for a positive rational reason as opposed to a negative rational reason, it will obviously conclude that the taking of any life may always be a viable option regardless of the reason. Forbin probably had never read Asimov (and the machine was probably developed at some lab in some university in Illinois, right?)
I have often thought back to this movie as I pound away at my desk computer, turn to my net-book, play with my smart phone, and watch more monitors going up everywhere people congregate. How much of our 'freedoms' are we giving up for safety, security, and information at a touch. How much are we willing to give up. This movie shows us a dark side of those concepts.
As an aside, I would have to wonder how the system would respond to a terrorist attack like 9/11, since that was obviously not rational. Would it threaten to kill everyone if the terrorists did not stop killing everyone?
A bigger question arising from this movie is - will artificial intelligence ever be truly intelligent if it can't admit it made a mistake - and worse, doesn't even know it?(Do we like Spock, the Vulcan, or Spock the half-breed? Was giving Data an emotion chip, a blessing or a curse? Would you trust your future to Sheldon or to Leonard?)
Rock Follies (1976)
Enjoyable little British Series
This is the type of show/movie/presentation I like writing about because it is rather obscure and only the 'faithful' will fully understand. PBS in the States in the late 1970's and early 1980's brought over some highly enjoyable British comedic fare, with 'Monty Python's Flying Circus', then 'No, Honestly', 'Rock Follies', and of course, 'Are You Being Served'.
It was, like, once you got hooked on watching one, you would stay to see the next. Rock Follies which followed the trials and tribulations of three young women who hoped to make it as a rock singing group was probably the weakest of the four as it seemed to lurch between biting comedy and bitter sweet drama with each episode showing the girls barely making it in whatever venue they were unceremoniously dropped, and then failure settling in.
If you really enjoy seeing a musical group starting from scratch and following their lives as they face numerous hurdles both professional and personal, with what would appear to be an insider's look at the music business, and you enjoy the music, then I would recommend this. And for those who remember that rather 'infamous' advertisement for a hair product, you'll get to see who Rula Lenska was. One of the first celebutantes (who really was neither, just like some we know today ;)
It's not for everyone's tastes but British tele can be that way to an American audience. Now when does Season 2 of Downton Abbey return?
The Rocking Horse Winner (1949)
That there must be more money can be a very sad way to live.
As we live day to day, barely making ends meet, there is often a wish for a new source of income, a raise perhaps, an unexpected inheritance, a forlorn wish to win something, anything! in the current lottery. Except how often do we really get ahead if any of these actually happen? More often than not, it just encourages one to spend more extravagantly.
And how often do children search out unconditional love from their parents, only to never get it? This movie, and the story it's based on, brings those two concepts chillingly together.
People have written both here and in other synopses about the major plot points reciting them fairly accurately, but what I found so unsettling, was the concept of the house itself constantly whispering - there must be more money. Who hasn't ever thought that at one time - and wondered where that cry was coming from? There must be more money. And when more money does come in, how long is that demand actually quiet, until once again it starts - there must be more money. There MUST be more money! Thankfully, there was very little religious overtones - no pact with the devil, no souls being visually taken. That would have spoiled it. The boy went to the greatest lengths to win the love of his mother. And we'll never really know if it was enough.
The phrase isn't 'Money is the root of all evil', it's actually 'The love of money is the root of all evil' and this movie strongly suggests that as the mother appeared to love money far more than her children. As well as belying a more modern phrase, 'Greed, for lack of a better term, is good.' This little movie asserts quite frighteningly just the opposite.
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)
A mildly enjoyable waste of an afternoon
I usually don't write reviews of fairly current, reasonably popular movies (I tend to like the odd older theatrical and TV fare), but after reading some of the message board posts, I felt the desire to toss in my 2¢ worth. I'm an 'older' movie lover having played my first arcade game around 1962 (baseball, with a real ball and a levered bat, I won 2 free games but my mother pulled me away).
Anyway, the first time I saw Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, I came in about evil-ex #2, so I didn't catch the set-up. But it didn't take me long to figure out that this movie was a fantasy, not reality, and the world it portrayed was based on arcade/video games. I appreciate plots and locations that shift reality around so long as they stay true to the newly invented world. To me, SPvsTW stayed that way.
Basically, the story follows that very old tried and true plot device, boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back. (btw, this could work for both girls Scott is currently interested in, Ramona AND Knives, depending on how you like your ending!) That can be okay, but only if there is something interesting going on. And with Scott Pilgrim now having to defeat the seven evil exes of his current girlfriend one (or two) at a time, in order to win her over, there is.
On a secondary level, it follows pretty much the outline for what used to be called a screwball comedy – unconventional, goes in different directions, behaves in unexpected ways (wikipedia). And more importantly it features not just one female character 'rarely seen in movies' but a number of very strong female characters each of whom is fairly capable of 'holding her own'. And it is close to being a sex comedy without the sex with the couple being obviously mismatched with the male further down the (economic or 'cool') scale than the woman (again it works for both Ramona and Knives). Oh, and witty repartee. An almost perfect fit - a screwball comedy for the 21st century.
One aspect that keeps the interest, is that in this 'arcade' game, Scott Pilgrim like in any good Adventure (yes, I played Colossal Cave a lot), has to use both his strength and his wits in totally different ways in order to defeat his opponents at each level. And the fights were very good, from a great graphic Battle of the Bands to figuring out how to hit a female without looking uncool, to tricking an opponent into making foolish mistakes (and being punished for them!), to Scott finally understanding how he should have been all along.
I found the ending somewhat of a surprise in that the viewer is almost led to believe one result will take place and then it's changed at the last second which goes with the basic screwball comedy concept.
Besides having a wealth of strong female roles, I also think this will be a great movie to come back to in later years to see a lot of future stars in early roles, as well as wondering where are they now for others, much like 'Magnificent Seven, American Graffiti, St. Elmo's Fire, have done for successive past generations of movie goers. I want to see Allison Pill, Ellen Wong, Kieran Culkin, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Aubrey Plaza, Brandon Routh, Chris Evans, Brie Larson in later films (like I already have Anna Kendrick).
My favorite line which cracks me up every time is Gideon (the token villain) saying, 'Do you know how long it took me to get all the evil exes' contact information
? Two hours! TWO HOURS!' (has Jason Schwartzman used something similar in 'Bored to Death'? That line could easily have come from his character there.) That and every utterance (and facial gesture or lack thereof!) by Allison Pill were very funny.
Some drawbacks because it's not a perfect movie (few are), Michael Cera (Scott Pilgrim) needs to work the camera better enlarging his range of emotions, most of the females and some of the males easily upstaged him. Some of the fights went on a little too long. Since I came in late for my first viewing (I've seen it 2 or 3 times since), I assumed Ellen Wong (Knives) was playing her real age, because she looked like a 20 something (except for very early in the movie with her longer hair in that ponytail sort of 'do'), so I had some problems accepting that set up when I finally caught the opening sequences.
For someone who has enjoyed the arcade/video gaming scene for a long time, I found it a very amusing pleasant brain-candy type of movie, (like The Fifth Element for instance), strictly an entertaining waste of 2 hours. A solid 7.
The Twilight Zone: Number 12 Looks Just Like You (1964)
Beauty is only be skin deep, Mind control is to the bone.
Most of the reviews focus on the obvious here, the concept of beauty and the extremes that people will take to achieve it, as well as the importance the state or society put upon it. Actually if beauty was the only thing going on here, the other episode, Eye of the Beholder is really a much better episode.
But I have always felt that there is a lot more that is going on here, besides the desire to be beautiful. In the end, what was the real shock, was that it wasn't enough just to be beautiful, one had to be forced to believe it. THAT was the scary part.
The girl just wanted to be herself. Yet, in this futuristic society, being oneself was no longer allowed, you had to be what others expected of you. That's the real danger in society, as the dregs of the 60's slowly disappear and we all through the internet and mass media get more and more into group-think, where we're told what we like and don't like, what's appropriate to wear or not, who is to be considered a celebrity or not. That episode was a warning of what may happen in the reaction to the liberal times when it was aired. That we're letting society dictate more and more of what we are to be, shows that much of the message here has been lost.
As we learn more and more about our genetic makeup and what genes can cause problems, and how they can be re-manipulated, the desire to also reduce any future individuality will go hand in hand with the advances of being beautiful. And we won't even realize it.
Any Human Heart (2010)
Neither loved it or hated it with nice production features
I only saw the two final episodes, so I missed some of the build-up, but I found it sort in interesting. One review said our hero was at key points in history, actually, he wasn't, he just happened to meet some people who were or became semi-famous. And anyway wouldn't we all remember what we were doing at key points, more so than most of our day to day lives? I liked the changing times and scenery and how Logan Mountstewart managed through and around them. I thought he was certainly lucky enough to have several fortunate events to come his way when he needed them the most such as Gloria (ex wife of a good friend) coming to pass the last days of her life just as he about destitute and bringing in some money, and then being bequeathed a house in France by somebody he barely met years before. I wish somebody would bequeath me a house! Typical 19th century English novel convenience. (see Jane Eyre) I found it a little hard to believe that he could abandon a dwelling for long periods of time, and then show up at them and have them not only be livable, but in fairly good repair. Houses don't work like that. But the running down of his flat over years was handled quite well.
Once I understood that, one, these were scenes from his life that he was recalling with some fondness, and two, that women played an important part in them (eight mostly which is where 'Octet' came from), it became a little interesting to see how he would fare.
One sequence I did find interesting, Kim Cattrell basically playing her age - and aging. And one sequence that should have affected me more because if done right, I can really get into it - his death was more happenstance than emotional. It was like, OK, he died, becoming a little better known and successful after death than he was while living.
That leads to one of the bigger drawbacks of the production, basically everything was 'telegraphed' way in advance. It took a lot of the drama out. You knew the Duke and Duchess of Windsor would turn on him; you knew, everyone he loved would die almost tragically; you knew his last - sort of - love did not really know the past and he would be rejected when he found out and told her of it.
Finally, one amusing but also embarrassing scene - Jim Broadbent trying to convince some 20-something left wing radicals that he had a lot in common with them. Neither his image nor the entire portrayal of Logan would lead anyone to accept that.
Most the reviews so far are either gushing orchid letters or scathing criticisms. It warrants neither. Some good and some bad, with good production values, which is why it's a generous 6.
Up in the Air (2009)
Not exactly what you want in a typical movie
So, do you want a movie that has a nice tidy ending where everybody lives happily ever after? How about a movie where promiscuity is demonized? Or a movie where corporate America is the bad guy? OK, maybe one where the protagonist (ie hero in most movies), has an awakening and ends up better off for it? Sorry, this movie is not for you. But do you want a movie that mostly is a slice of real life, with people facing real problems, and reacting to them like people in the rest of the country do? Where everything is not nicely tied (or tidied) up like most Hollywood fantasies? Maybe you want a movie that gets you thinking about relationships, and what having a job - or losing it - means, and how important families can be.
Or maybe a movie showing the disengagement too many people are having in the early 21st century as the workplace and jobs go through monumental changes.
George Clooney plays Ryan Bingham, an employee of a third party company that is hired to fire people and flies around the country doing so, so the the company actually responsible for the firing can keep their hands clean of something they know in their hearts is very dirty business. (I've been through that process) He's a professional and goes about it professionally, meeting people face to face, gauging their reactions and changing his delivery depending on how the person is taking it.
A new kid on the block shows up in the person of Natalie Keener, a recent business school graduate who wants to depersonalize the firing (if it isn't already!) by using internet virtual meeting rooms and web cams to do the firing, which will put Ryan out of a job.
Ryan only does two positive things in the movie, he talks his future brother-in-law, who gets cold feet on the day of his wedding, to go through with it, and he writes a letter of recommendation for Natalie which sells her to the company she applies to after quitting her job at Ryan's company, because she thinks she somehow failed. And that's about it. The rest of the movie is a study in mostly disconnected relationships and how people cope.
***spoiler here*** At the end of the movie, Ryan is back doing his job, because he is really good at it, and he knows it. And he is wanted because of it.
There's a love interest, played, to me anyway, quite well by Vera Farmiga. She knows exactly what she wants out of life, and exactly where Ryan's character fits (). And it's obvious some reviewers feel uneasy about an independent sexually active woman who is not somehow made to be villainous.
Not a 10 by a long shot, but a decent little movie about one slice of life. And guess what? Most of our lives and future seem to be up in the air more than we would like.
Updated 2/22/2024 - one final thought. I often wondered about the next to last scene in the movie where Ryan Bingham walks into an airport and stops and looks up at the big Arrival/Departure board and just stands there a moment. And then watching the movie again, about 1/3 the way through, The Anna Kendrick character is asking him to explain the 'miles' programs, and after he does, she says in effect 'If I had all those miles, I'd walk into an airport, look at the big board, choose a destination and just go.' Well, that's more or less what he did. The final scene was just his philosophizing about who he is.
Tron (1982)
Interesting Film Especially For Its Time
OK, Sherman, set the Wayback for ..... What made this film very enjoyable for me were the references they used. That first line above is Flynn sitting in his room talking to Bradley (and maybe Lora). Taken from Mr. Peabody's Improbable History, a segment of Rocky and Bullwinkle. Now, forward to Bradley's cube, which was a perfect replica of cube farms that were quickly populating the countryside. And there on Bradley's wall was the phrase 'Gort, Klaatu berata nicto'. Taken from 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' which were words that Michael Rennie told Patricia Neal to say to the robot.
Two little sequences, two references to popular culture, just before Trivial Pursuit (I was there at a pivotal moment for that icon)and I have do doubt there were more, that had to endear the movie to computer nerds and geeks everywhere. Not much, but seeing those, I knew somebody 'got it'. And to me, that is very important in movie making and relating to the audience (something I slammed in my review of the 2009 movie 'Land of the Lost'). I went to work for the old Burroughs Corp. right exactly at that time, 1981, and guess what their mainframe operating system was called? Yep, 'MCP'.
The rest was interesting but straight forward storyline, some plot holes, and great graphics that still hold up. And a great sequence of lines 'here goes nothing' ... you mean 'here goes something, here comes nothing'.
The light racer program was one of the first I played on a computer (just after Colossal Cave and StarTrek and that irritating Mouse game). I have always thought that Flynn's program name was Klu or short for kludge, because that's what he really was...or did, as his presence kludged the program giving Tron's user the ability to get in.
Reading some of the reviews here, makes me realize that you had to see it in 1981-2 and understand what was going on at that time, and how much, or actually how little everyone knew, to really appreciate the movie. They didn't get it entirely right, but they were on the right track.
And anyway, at that time I happened to enjoy Bruce Boxleitner, Jeff Bridges, and Barnard Hughes. Cindy Morgan was nice as was David Warner being evil. See him in this and see him in the George C. Scott 'A Christmas Carol' and you'll have a hard time believing it's the same person. He was in his 'Titanic' persona for this one.
I'm seeing hints that the new movie seems to reference this one, bringing back actors and roles, etc. That gives it a head start for me. The original 'Tron' is worth the watch, if only to see the beginnings of cg.
The Buccaneers (1956)
Another great obscure TV series of the 1950's
I was about 10 or so when I discovered this on TV in the States in first run. I had no clue as to first run, repeats, or anything like that, only that I found some shows and would watch them intently. And what an enjoyable time watching swordplay, great sailing ships go at it in battle, feats of derring-do tempered with some humor. And what a role model Dan Tempest was for a young boy. How could you not imagine yourself on some privateer battling the Spaniards or other pirates.
I remember seeing him next in From Russia With Love and it took me some time to realize who he was and where I had seen him before.
A very enjoyable series, along with The Three Musketeers (which I have reviewed) and Adventures of Robin Hood (which will come). TV series like these are only a dream today where the basic set is just an apartment living room and a coffee shop. Give me the world!
If you can get a copy, just sit back and enjoy. And I hope current or future versions will include the original theme song - that alone was fun to sing along with.
No, Honestly (1974)
Excellent English Comedy With Two Outstanding Actors
My wife and I watched this faithfully in the late 1970's when it was shown on PBS and we were just married. We laughed throughout the entire 13 episodes. And we watched almost as faithfully when they were run again, because the show was so hilarious.
I can still vividly remember a number of the episodes, and like another reviewer, one that stays etched is the one where CD and his 'parents' are invited to Clara's for dinner, only he is basically an orphan but is ashamed to admit it, so he asks his current stage 'parents' to stand in. At the same time, Clara's family's cook and server are gone for the night and they have to hire temporary help. And then the stage parents don't show up. It is a laugh out loud show from beginning right up to the surprising end with mistaken identities played for all its worth.
The others I remember are their first meeting at a cocktail party where Clara was trying to read War and Peace, I believe, so she wouldn't have to meet people, and CD persisted to their shared enrichment.
And the one where CD tried to update Clara's wardrobe with a hilarious ending. And their honeymoon, where Clara was insistent that they appear as an 'old married couple'. (and the one where she faithfully ironed his shoelaces before he went on an interview)
John Alderton was good, but Pauline constantly stole the show with her appealing good humor, her smile regardless of what was happening, and her acceptance of most things at face value. You couldn't help but laugh at her, with her, and feel sorry for her at the same time, and just marvel in her continuing innocence and trusting nature.
Much of the humor is British and it may take repeated playbacks to catch the rapid-fire deliveries, but for fans of Pauline, and those who like silly innocent humor, it's worth every penny. No, honestly!
Land of the Lost (2009)
What Audience Was This For?
First, I'm not sure what the complaining about the ratings is all about. Most critics would have given this a 1 or 2 to read the professional reviews. I think a 5 or 6 is quite reasonable, unless you love Will Ferrell.
I tried, I really tried to watch the original Land of the Lost when it was on, but it was obviously for kids about 6-12 (boys and girls) that being fairly older than that (late teens to early 20's), I just couldn't get into it. I mean, a park ranger and his two kids? A poor man's Lost in Space.
I turned it on several times (I really remember all the creatures, but the stars faces are lost to me!) The problem I have with this is that I think the writers/producers/directors were torn between what audience to appeal to - fans of the original Land of the Lost who would be in their 40's - 50's, or young boys 12-16.
So, they made a movie that really didn't appeal to either. Just fans of Will. Fine. I get the zaniness of the movie. Three lovable losers. Pratfall after pratfall. But, the dino urine turned me off. I get it, you didn't have to hit me over the head twice more (the second dose, the, uh, yeah!).
But I suppose what really turned me off was reading that two of the original stars were given cameos and then cut. Sorry, that tells me the writers/producers/directors didn't really love the original (how could they, they must have been about 3 - or less! - when it originally aired!). Part of the appeal of nostalgia is tossing out little appreciations to the original fans - like cameos. Because they axed them, to me, it meant they also axed the original audience.
I get the humor, sarcasm, satire, but it didn't do much. 5 is much better than 1, but it's only a so-so comedy.
La esclava del paraíso (1968)
Rather Mediocre Movie, but better than sitting in a barracks room
When you're stationed in the military in a rather forlorn place, and you don't care to get drunk every night, and night school classes don't yet hold an appeal, the movie theater is pretty much the only other alternative for escape.
In 1968 and into 69, I watched numerous fair to really bad movies at the base theater about 2 blocks from our barracks. This, The Green Slime, Sweet November, etc. If you've seen them, you know how desperate some of us were.
But Luciana Paluzzi did brighten the screen in several of them. She had a run of, what?, six or seven movies during this time? Outside of her slightly more skimpy than Barbara Eden's I Dream of Jeannie outfit, what was memorable were some of her lines. When introduced, explaining that she couldn't do all the things a regular genie could do, she remarked that she was only a 'second-class' genie, having been demoted for insubordination. That probably got the biggest laugh out of the 100% military audience.
Other than that, this was a very unremarkable costume drama in the Arabian Nights motif, though in a rather heavily vegetation-ed landscape, so no sand dune escapades.
A mostly forgettable movie, slightly better than the others, but not quite 'bad' enough to be ranked with an Ed Wood production.
The Bubble (1966)
Thin Plot, Fair 3D Effects, From a Forgotten Movie
I watched this movie in first run in the Chicago area in 1966-67. I even remember the girl I was dating. And looking around at the audience all wearing the special 3D glasses.
Anway, here's the spoiler. The plot, such as it was, could be compared to a bunch of kids collecting ants, grasshoppers, etc. and putting them into a glass jar, and tossing in what ever they think would make the insects seem at home, grass, twigs, leaves.
So, if some alien kid did the same to humans, what would it toss in? Part of the Lincoln Memorial, bits and pieces of things from around the world. And if a specimen died, what would a kid do? Remove it quickly not knowing if its death would affect the others still in the jar.
And might bugs do if trapped in a jar? Possibly try to do the things by rote they did before. And if a new bug accidentally flew into the jar unawares, it would probably spend some time trying to figure out how to get out before falling into a repetitive life.
Here's the plot in brief. Husband and wife out flying with a pilot get caught in a storm (imagine the storm from War of the Worlds), and are forced to land inside the jar/bubble. Most of the other inhabitants are living their lives as if they're robots, going through the motions of their occupations. Our heroes try to get out, the pilot dies in an attempt.
I believe at the end, the bubble is lifted, but I don't remember if there is any kind of conclusion.
The 3D effects were silly, like firemen carrying a ladder into the audience. Most of them had little to do with furthering the plot. I believe Johnny Desmond (the pilot) got to sing a song. He was a 2nd rate Al Martino about 10 years earlier (if you get the joke).
Not much of a movie, and probably helped stifle 3D for awhile...until (ta da) late 2009.
I tre moschettieri (1956)
One of several television series I watched
There were three or four series on early television in the mid-1950's that I watched as a pre-teen and really enjoyed. Robin Hood starring Richard Greene, The Buccaneer starring Robert Shaw, and most likely this one (I remember Sebastian Cabot) in a series on the Three Musketeers.
The episode I remember most vividly had them in a country inn where Porthos got drunk and they got into a bet where the others claimed he was very strong. To prove it, he lifted the center post supporting the inn's roof and it crashed around them. The innkeeper sued for damages and the rest of the half hour show was about the musketeers attempting to raise funds to pay for lawyers and a defense (one of them sang love songs to the daughter of one of the lawyers).
When the trial was called, the judge asked for the evidence for the plaintiff and the innkeeper produced a small piece of paper with the cost of the damages. The judge called for defense evidence and several lawyer assistants wheeled in massive amounts of paperwork. The judge looking at the weight of evidence found in favor of the musketeers.
Another tragedy averted. And I use this as a prime example of our judicial system.
The production values were quite high, the stories were fun. I enjoyed this as much as the other series.
Flash Gordon (1980)
Great Fun - Especially for the fans of the first serial
To really enjoy this film you should be a fan of Buster Crabbe's serials from the 1930's, especially, and I mean especially the first. The second was fair and the third was sort of boring, but I digress.
This may pay homage to the original comic page strips, but it's also obvious that it pays a lot of respect to the first serial. Except this has so much color as to be almost overwhelming. And for most of the characters, they have so completely made them over the top, but that's exactly how most of us fans of the original would remember them. Well, except for Prince Barin, who here is played far more dashing than the poor miscast actor in the original (overweight and balding just doesn't cut it even if his acting was adequate).
I would have liked to see the sharkmen instead of the treemen (who were in the second serial and were probably the most pathetic characters in that one) as well Thun and his Lionmen, but Vultan and his hawkmen more then make up for that loss.
Enjoy it for what it is, a tribute to the original comic strip and original serial, Flash Gordon.
Fantastic Voyage (1966)
Nice little SF movie, Raquel doing one of her patented frigid roles
OK, I have to tell this story. I went to see it, first run - 1966, on a double date. This was back in the days when you could walk in anytime and stay as long as you wanted.
So, we got there, sat down and (Spoiler coming), it's almost the end of the previous showing, and I'm thinking, OK, the climax must have happened about 5 minutes earlier and this is the denouement (concluding scenes winding down).
So we watch the entire movie and I realize as we get to it, that I saw the climatic scene when we first got there - they have abandoned ship (the Proteus) and are shooting through a mass of tangles and then make it through the optic nerve to the eye and are rescued. That was the climax.
Was I let down. It was actually interesting to that point - even Stephen Boyd's almost wooden acting, and Raquel Welch doing her best to look all sciency and proper. It was a nice average mid-60's SF movie, nothing special, but adequate.
I watched all Raquel's movies during this time - Fathom, Biggest Bundle. etc. She sure gave Jill St. John a run for iceberg queen. All show and maybe just the barest hint of double entendre's - her slightly undersized high collared uniform.
Of course, Donald Pleasance made the movie, like he usually did.
Three Days of the Condor (1975)
A Little Dated, Interesting Story Line, Decent Action, Ambiguous End
As others have pointed out, there are some good things about this movie, and some things that drag it down a little. I have always enjoyed it, but when I saw it in first release, at the time, it meant a lot more.
One thing I would like to add to the reviews is a note on the final dialog between Turner (Redford) and Higgins (Robertson). It's like this is the real climax of the movie and we are (supposedly) given both sides to choose from - Robertson's Hobson's choice: sign a pact with devil and you'll survive, or Redford's: the lone hero can still stand up against the government and win.
We don't know who will win here, but we are supposed to hope for Redford's side.
Just remember that Higgnes was only a mid-level CIA functionary who had been routinely passed over for promotion. Even Houseman's character (Wabash as one of the head CIA officers) wonders why. Think on this as you watch the ending - who exactly does Higgins speak for? The Agency? The Government? His own altruistic (and most likely mistaken) belief in the Agency? Do you think Wabash actually believes this scenario? Or is this the Company line? And how many other Atwoods are there? I'm sure the conspiracy theorists loved (and still love) this movie.
Kelly's Heroes (1970)
An Enjoyable Lightly Ant-war dramedy
I have read a number of these comments with interest because I served in the military from the late 60's to early 70's and saw Kelly's Heroes in theatrical release and numerous times on TV since then. I found this film to be funny, sad, thought provoking, and enjoyable, mostly because of the cast and how their characters were written and how they were allowed to develop.
Basically, the plot is about a squad of exhausted US Army enlisted men during World War 2, sent back to the rear for some rest and relaxation, but ordered to stay in camp, who are then given the chance by an enterprising PFC (Clint Eastwood as PFC Kelly) to score a major heist, behind enemy lines and unknown to the Allied command - if they can get everything coordinated. The movie tells the tale of if and how the plan was carried out and what unexpected obstacles were presented during the operation and how they dealt with them.
I'm not going to go into the humor provided by several of the actors (Don Rickles, Donald Sutherland, etc). but a couple of things seem to have been missed by others in the basic premise of the plot. Kelly had been a lieutenant but his commission was pulled and he was demoted (busted) for leading a totally successful attack against an objective given to him by his commanding officers. The problem was that the objective was another Allied position which had been misidentified. The character still has the smarts and leadership skills of an officer but is now just a PFC. So he is a victim of a screwed up military. And you can see the tension between his character and that of his ostensible sergeant, Big Joe (Telly Savalas).
One note about Sutherland's character Oddball, I'll grant that it is highly unlikely that a character like him existed during WW2, spouting mid to late 60's hippie platitudes. Yet I will also say that during my time in the military, I came across a number of characters that appear as updated versions of the roles played by the other actors. Colonels who were full of it (you wouldn't believe some of the things I saw), lieutenants who ranged from Academy graduate 'strack' troops to the 90 day wonder let's get by as easily as possible kind. Sergeants who ranged from mad dogs to pushovers, and any number of conniving enlisted men. And I've also seen the committed, caring, let's get it done and move on types.
I can also easily understand how the lower ranking types on the other side, can with a little help, see how they have more in common with their enemy counterparts then with their senior officers, because I witnessed it.
And yes, I've also seen humor through even the most trying of situations. I can see the men in Big Joe's squad understanding exactly what he means when he talks about so much luck, and I can see the men also understanding Kelly's well thought out plans if their luck runs out, it runs out, but at least for a few moments they can control a tiny bit of their own destiny, because they can see all too well the results of the orders that resulted in Kelly's original platoon completely wiping out everyone there. The important thing is they (and we) can see both the strengths and weaknesses of both characters.
The movie was one of the more enjoyable war/caper/antiwar films I've seen and except for how loud the music was at times, I would highly recommend it.
Downhill Racer (1969)
Decent Ski Movie, Redford Doing His Loner Thing
After reading the several pages of comments, I wonder if some of the other reviewers really 'saw' this film. I grew up loving the sport of skiing and when the movie came out, I was almost obsessed with skiing. Unfortunately, I'm from the flatlands and so had to content myself for most of the year with vicarious experiences like Warren Miller films and marginal movies like Killy's 'Snow Job' and 'Hot Dog The Movie' ('Better Off Dead' was a much better film from a skiing standpoint). Miller's films were fine, but those other two movies were trash. Of course, none of them, not even this one, could compete with 'Ski the Outer Limits' and 'The Moebius Flip', but those were in another league altogether.
So, we have Downhill Racer
. the biography of Bill Johnson. OK, not really, because Johnson could give great interviews. But the brash American who believed only in himself, well, I guess Bode would now also fit. The humor in the movie was that when it was made, the European skiing community scoffed. Not that it was a good or bad movie, but they could not accept a plot where an American!!! could win the Olympic Downhill Gold. Remember this was before 1984 and Bill Johnson.
Being an avid skier (even club racing) and reading everything I could find (several mags and two newsletters, besides many books), I had an awareness of some of the lesser known stories. And there was certainly some leeway taken in how the movie was presented. For example, at that time, World Cup skiing was pretty much amateur for the Americans and fully professional for the Europeans, although totally under the table (Avery Brundage the last Olympic commissioner to have an absurd fantasy belief in amateurism - couldn't control the Europeans but he ruled with an iron fist over the Americans).
Often, quite competitive American skiers were left at home because the National team budget didn't have enough money. Or how Karl Schranz (sort of who the character, Max Meier, was based on) was robbed of the Downhill medal in 1964 by Jean Claude Killy (or rather by the judges at the French resort where it was held). And that the American ski team was more than just male downhillers (oh, yes, with women barely mentioned in the movie during that interview with the rather naïve American reporter), when in reality it included slalom and giant slalom racers, some of whom raced in the 3 disciplines available then (the Cochrans, the Palmers, the Mahres are easy examples).
The irony of the final scene in the movie, is that here, after all that David Chappellet put into winning the Olympic gold, by the time he did, he is no longer the young brash new skier on the block. The kid that almost beat him, was in reality a younger, brasher, newer version, that, looking at both as the one skis off the course and the other again accepts the accolades that had almost dried up, makes us think that at the height of his fame and glory, poor David Chappellet is now washed up, a has been, for the skiing community is about to move on to its next wunderkid.
One or more of the other reviewers here erroneously wrote that the competition was a Super G. Well, since the Olympics allowed all comers (sort of, remember the Jamaican Bobsled team and Eddie the amateur ski jumper), they regularly 'dumbed' down the Olympic downhill courses so they became what we think of as today's Super-G. The Europeans knew that the real yearly races like the Hahnenkamm or Lauberhorn were the true tests of downhill racing. Also, the yearly winners of the World Cup as well as the World Alpine Championships were held in much higher regard by the racers and cognoscenti than Olympic winners, unless it was one of the chosen Europeans who won the Gold, of course.
Redford, in an interview, said he especially liked the scenes that his character had with his father back home (in Idaho Springs, Ida
no, Colorado) during the off season. I found those dreary at best. It reminded me of that scene in 'Love Story' where the hero, who was ONLY captain of the Harvard Ice Hockey Team was sneered at by his father who had been an OLYMPIC competitor. Of course, I did get a little hungry for some Ritz crackers while watching Redford. I'm not sure how you can live in the mountains, that kind of setting, and not know anything about competitive skiing, or at least the Olympics. By the 60's thanks to Jim McKay and Wide World of Sports, most people had heard of Killy and were now commonly confusing Billy Kidd with Jean-Claude. Such is the price of fame.
For a ski movie, the race scenes were riveting, the acting of people like Gene Hackman and Dabney Coleman was quite adequate, the beauty of Camilla Sparv was eye pleasing. It was a decent movie, but still confined to a certain time. Better to watch the movie as a part of a series in the career of Redford Downhill Racer, Little Fauss and Big Halsey, ending with The Candidate, where he began to play larger characters. He was still the loner, but in a bigger and often more important setting. At least here he had broken out of his 'silly' movies 'Inside Daisy Clover', 'The Chase', 'This Property is Condemned' and the like, even 'Barefoot in the Park' in some ways, his first starring movie. Of course, it was 'Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid' that completely changed the way we looked at Redford, both past and present.
THX 1138 (1971)
Visually stimulating first attempt
After reading a number of these comments, I'm not sure I saw the same movie as many of those posting here. I have not seen the director's cut, only the original on television (tho possibly, I did see the original in a theater, I'm certainly old enough, and it's been a number of years).
The following is my concept of the story line Humans have been reduced to almost a machine like existence. Machines (AI) now control everything. A number of humans perform work that is quite hazardous and possibly inimical to the machines, so since humans are replaceable, no serious attempt is made at protecting them from potential threatening tasks.
Humans are totally controlled by medications (drugs) along with limited brainwashing and subliminal suggestions. One of the humans, called THX1138, goes off his medications and begins wondering about what is going on. He falls 'in love' (that may have little meaning in this world) with another human woman, LUH, who has already stopped taking hers.
The Donald Pleasance character, SEN, is also 'in love' with LUH and tries to thwart THX's desires.
Both are found out by the powers that rule this existence and are sentenced to additional brainwashing and more drugs. THX is 'thrown' into a strange jail it's all white light with no break in any direction. THX breaks out of his 'jail', with SEN and another prisoner and discovers that LUH has been eliminated in some fashion and her name/ID has been given to a newborn infant. He now runs for his life with the other prisoner while SEN returns to be controlled again.
The robot police follow both (who have stolen and are now driving futuristic type cars) into the edges of the 'city' which is under construction (or the construction has been abandoned) and where mutants or those other humans who are not ruled by the machines now reside in almost a feral state. The other prisoner is killed in a car crash while THX continues on. Every so often during the chase, the viewer gets a screen shot of some kind of updating spreadsheet of numbers being crunched as 'seen' by the robot policeman. Basically these numbers are the cost/benefit values of catching THX and bringing him back.
THX eventually abandons his 'car' and begins running and just as he is climbing a ladder up some kind of tube, at his last attempt at escape and the one robot policeman still following him has practically caught up to him and is about to grab him, the cost/benefit numbers now show that further pursuit is no longer quantitatively justified and the policeman abruptly stops his pursuit and returns to his other duties.
THX continues climbing the ladder and emerges above ground (we now find out that the 'city' is subterranean) to the sun at the horizon either setting over the Pacific (most likely) or rising to a new day in the human existence.
Several thoughts come to mind first, in this future the accountants have won as once the budget numbers for the project (THX's capture) exceed a certain value, the cost/benefit ratio now shows that further pursuit is no longer cost effective, regardless that the robot policeman practically has THX in his grip. Second we have no idea what future there is for THX. Is this a new day where he will return to the city and lead others to 'freedom', or is this truly the end of mankind? I found The Matrix rather similar to this movie, just on a far more advanced level. AI rules the future and humans are reduced to serving the machines (dangerous jobs vs. power cells). One person is able to break out from the stupor induced by the machines which has kept humans in line. This movie stops with his escape into a different world from the controlled existence of the machines, while The Matrix follows the protagonist's attempts to completely thwart the machines and give control back to the humans.
I found the movie thought provoking and visually stimulating. I applaud Lucas' attempt to depict a striking possible future world and how mankind fares in the face of adversity, as opposed to too many directors who lazily show the future as not much more than a highly stylized version of their present. There isn't much action, so those liking that will be disappointed.