RoseAnn Reviews

Tilt (2005)

What can they do for a second season???

[13 March 2005]

*spoilers if you haven't seen the finale...read at your own peril...*

Okay, so how predictable was that??

All the good guys won; all the bad guys got what they deserved; and the guy who straddled the line between the two got the brass ring because he (pardon the horrible pun) played his cards right.

And so we drink a final toast to Seymour...the cop goes home to Iowa...our three young heroes leave the field of battle vindicated and much, much richer.

What can they do for a season two?? A new bad guy for us to hate?? New unknown card players for us to cheer on to victory? And Lowball making another interesting visit to the house of ill repute?!?!?!?

It was interesting and novel for one go-round...sort of the way Survivor was for the first season...but won't this get predictable if they try it again?

I did enjoy the poker scenes, although there were certainly blatant errors (I even saw one tonight...when you watch the finale, look at the screen closely on Clark's last hand and see if you spot what I did). It was nice to see the sprinkling of the well-known players throughout the series. But I'd much rather watch the reruns of the WSOP if it came down to a choice between that and another season of this show.

I'll give the season a 6 out of 10...good acting for the most part (although Michael Madsen did seem a bit flat to me most of the time...but maybe that was the jaded part of his character). Points off for such a predictable plot and finale. There was just one more cliché they could have thrown in to make the fairy tale complete...reveal that Miami was Seymour's long lost granddaughter or niece or some distant relative (I thought about daughter, but that kind of destroys the part of the storyline that she was playing to raise money for her father's bail with Seymour's assistance).

But, of course, I will tune in for at least the first episode of another season...if nothing else to see the real-life pros wander in and out of that very realistic-looking set.

P.S. (added after second viewing a few minutes ago): ACK! I just caught the final scene...which I somehow missed the first time. That changes everything...and potentially changes the cast for next season (if there is one). Not quite such a tidy ending as it first appeared. Hmm....

Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)

I left the theatre both angry and energized...

[10/10 · 26 June 2004]

First, I have to share this (because I'm wondering if it happened anywhere else): There were *mall security guards* posted inside our theatre in case of trouble in the audience...and there were actually a few rowdy people (who obviously did not like what they were seeing on the screen) who had to be removed!

I left the theatre angry...angry because if even one-half of what we saw during that two hours was true and these idiots are allowed to remain in office for another four years I swear I'm moving to Canada the day after the election. I've read both Clarke's and O'Neill's accounts of their experiences with this current government, and I had no reason to doubt that *both* of these two intelligent long-time government employees would out-and-out lie and tell the same stories just to sell their books. Obviously much of the video and interview material we saw bore out that what they wrote was true.

I left the theatre energized...energized because I'm determined to work every day between now and the first Tuesday of November to make sure the people we saw on that movie screen do not have a job after January 20th.

Last night I saw a critic complain that the movie was not "objective". Well, duh! Someone on the panel with him pointed out that in order to effectively combat idiots like Rush and Michael Reagan in the media the other side finally realized that you don't fight with knives when the other side is fighting with guns. Yes, that's a bad pun off of "Bowling with Columbine" I know...but the point is still a valid one.

I agree that this movie will probably win every other major award of the year, including the Oscars. Kudos if it does. What I (and I suspect most of you reading this board) care more about is that this movie will help us sweep the garbage out of Washington in November. I'm not naive enough to think that any politician is perfect or will be 100% honest with us...but ANYTHING has to be better than what we have there now.

1st to Die (2003 TV Movie)

I've never read Patterson, but...

[18 October 2003]

...he has to be a better writer than this movie portrayed.

The actors and actresses were excellent. Especially noteworthy, as has already been mentioned, were Tracy Pollen and Robert Patrick.

But...by the time I got to the end of this movie, I was totally confused. Who did what/why/when/how?? I got what the final motive was supposed to be, but that was about all.

And could someone explain to me the meaning of the Russian roulette scene?

I guess I need to get one of Patterson's books to read before I sit through another Patterson adaptation. Usually seeing a good made-for-TV movie makes me want to go buy the writer's work for enjoyment. In this case, I feel the need to go read this book so I can understand what I just spent the last 2+ hours watching. I'm not so much intrigued as annoyed.

Five stars out of ten for casting. Nothing for storyline. What I got most from this movie was a frustrating headache...

The Last Castle (2001)

Good, but too predictable

[4 October 2003]

MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD:

It was great to see Robert Redford in a role that showed his acting ability (it's been a long time!). However, this movie would have been much more enjoyable if: (HERE COME THE SPOILERS):





--it wasn't so apparent that Redford would go from a reluctant "I'm just here to serve my time" prisoner to "I'm going to lead a revolution!" hero;

--we didn't know from the first moment we heard the stutter that this would be the guy who would die, creating the catalyst for the revolt;

--we didn't know that (1) Gandolfini would have a chance to get Redford out of the prison, and refuse; (2) would then do anything he could to discredit him; and finally (3) offer to "make peace" when it was too late to stop the inevitable;

--the colonel's "mole" hadn't changed so quickly to a good guy. Come on, we all knew the scene in the colonel's office was staged, especially once we heard that something had been stolen. The who-how-when was so contrived...

--we didn't believe that the prisoners would win 90% of the battle with few weapons and much ingenuity. And when the heck did they build that catapult? I know *how* they made it, but when? Where did they hide it?

--it wasn't SO very, very obvious how this was going to end. DUH. I could predict down to the last detail when we got to the final ten minutes...and I was right.

If I hadn't seen this all before, this would have been a much more enjoyable movie. But everything happened just the way you expected it to happen...no twists, no surprises. If any *one* of the above scenarios had been tweaked a little, this movie would stand out from others of the same genre. No such luck...

I'll give it 7 out of 10. Some good character development with Redford and Gandolfini, but also some storylines that were never resolved (what happened to the daughter...more accurately, why was she there in the first place???) Definitely not a movie that I'd watch again given a choice. If you're looking for a good prison movie, watch "Shawshank Redemption" or "Escape from Alcatraz". This one has no surprises.