Dukat-4 Reviews

Avenue 5 (2020–2022)

OK at first, but gets tremendously better

[8/10 · 7 July 2020]

It starts quite rocky as it is one of those 'incompetent ignorant management running things' type of shows. And at the beginning all of it, and all of the characters, follow this scheme, which makes it just another one of those shows with a 'been there, done that, heard that joke' vibe.

It gets better, and funnier, as the writers build the world and the characters get fleshed out, but, since this is a sci-fi setting, it becomes painfully obvious that it is not made by people who know science or sci-fi, which would help writing better stories and better jokes.

And I can't help thinking that it would work a whole lot better if it were set in a Star Trek-like world.

ETA: The above was my initial impression after watching the first three or four episodes. Well, I'm glad I decided to continue. It gets better. MUCH better. It finds its own way of doing things, and gets science (fiction)- ier and funnier in the second half of the season.

Alarm für Cobra 11 - Die Autobahnpolizei (1996– )

Ridiculously unrealistic, but funny as hell.

[8/10 · 20 February 2019]

Hey, it's pure escapism. Sure it's not real... but it's fun, and has better stunts than the average Hollywood action movie.

Then again, I'm probably prejudiced, because I live an hour's drive away from where the bulk is filmed, and It's a nice change to see my neck of the woods the location of exaggerated car stunts and full-auto shootouts instead of Los Angeles.

The makers are quite aware of the ridiculousness, given the amounts of in-jokes regarding Autobahn locations (most of them the standard rush-hour traffic jams you would know from such radio stations as the WDR2) that everyone here knows, though they do not look remotely like the real thing.

The Orville (2017–2022)

Star Trek TNG 2.0

[10/10 · 9 March 2018]

That's what it is. It's Star Trek TNG. Not a spoof. It's a straight-up version of Star Trek TNG (except in name) with some annoying little things improved. Things like not having aloof, over-the-top idealized characters. Humor. Better music (TNG had this annoying habit of engaging a large classical orchestra, and then not use it).

The Orville avoids the big pitfalls of the official reboots who kick out about everything of Star Trek, even the large chunks that are good (production design first and foremost), and not knowing how to improve upon it because they do not what makes Trek Trek.

It's very annoying to read professional critics who slam the Orville, which is very nice, fun, and Trek at heart, because they completely miss the point. They see it as another Seth-MacFarlane-humor vehicle, which it isn't at all.

It's a better Trek. And a damn fine one at that.

MacGyver (2016–2021)

Where's the Theme Song?

[5/10 · 19 June 2017]

There's another Peter Lenkov product, "Hawaii Five-0", that, according to rumor, wouldn't reprise the iconic theme song until composer Brian Tyler stepped up and declared "You can't have Hawaii 5-0 without the theme song!" Well, Lenkov didn't learn, because you can't have MacGyver without Randy Edelman's theme song. There's another anecdote where Ben Burtt asked Steven Spielberg about Indy Jones: "Is this the type of movie where the hero never loses his hat?" The theme song is MacGyver's hat-that-never-falls-off: It defines the show. Take it away, and you don't know the mood and style. I've only seen the first two episodes of the reboot so far -- there's some bad, a lot of good, and a lot of that's fixable, but one of the worst decision was the scrapping of the theme song, and good background music. It's a B-type action show, and it needs a loud and brassy background music, not this "NCIS LA" drone. I've read it gets better; but if they keep this dreadful music, it will never reach the nostalgia of the original MacGyver (that was not really a good show in any measure, but it was sure a lot of fun. George Ends seems to get it; Sandrine Holt doesn't. I hear she's written out later on, which is understandable.)

ETA: After a few years, here's my advice to the producers: Remake some old 1960s "Mission: Impossible" episodes; would be tons better. My advice to viewers: Watch those old shows until the producers do.

Hawaii Five-0: Pono Kaulike (2015) Season 5, Episode 18

WTF was that?

[3/10 · 23 November 2015]

Oh wow. What a mess. The thing about a lot of episodes of this series, and this one here in particular, is that there's a whole lot of setup, but NO come back. They set up this huge big story or action scene ... and then ... nothing. So there flying over to Columbia, and have to fight off air defenses. Their goal: Take over a abandoned refinery and take control of a HUGE stash of cocaine. OK. Next thing, they're back in HawaI'i and talk with the bad guy: "Oh, BTW, FYI, we burned your cocaine, but we found this". Wouldn't it be nice to SHOW us how the did it? But no, ALL the story lines crammed into this episode just end with some (not very witty) one-liner. And there's much of story; the two story lines (Dann-O and Chin Ho) just scream to be told separately, in two episodes, as a two-parter, but Dann-O's story could have been stretched over two or three episodes alone without being boring and filled with action.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Not as Bad as Said, but Worst of the series

[7/10 · 31 August 2014]

Temple of Doom and this movie share one thing: Indy absolutely panics about snakes.

Oh, I get it. He hates snakes. He says so in Raiders. But he still manages to overcome his hate and climbs down to them into the Well of Souls.

In Doom and here, though, he absolutely panics. Slapstick-level. Up to the point to threaten his life. Both movies are considered the bad ones. Coincidence? I think not.

It seems that the creators of the series did not realize the bad decisions they made in Doom. For Crystal Skull, they took every bad idea they had, and turned it up to 11. It's still not a complete failure, considering it's meant to be a homage to 50s B-movie, but a wholly unworthy entrance into the series.

There are too many unbelievable narrow escapes, too much slapstick, too much bad jokes (prairie dogs? Really?) tight spots they came out of by sheer luck, not talent, and too much superstitious hocus pocus. Sure there were artifacts of unbelievable power in the two better movies, but their power was kept for the climax. Doom also had some overbearing magic (glowing river stones and open-heart surgery), and it nearly killed the movie. Here, though, the magical powers of the crystal skull are present throughout the movie, and often drive the plot. Too often.

It's still an entertaining ride, but a noticeable shift in tone that makes this almost not-Indy.

Mission: Impossible III (2006)

Alias: The Movie

[2/10 · 31 October 2006]

Whatever this was, it was not "Mission: Impossible". It felt more like "Alias: The Movie". It's clear that no one involved has ever seen or understood the concept of the grand old 60s spy series. The original dealt with intelligent people conning intelligent bad people into a corner which they couldn't escape. The keyword is "intelligent". The heroes were normal people, each with a distinct specialty, and they planned everything carefully. And no matter what happened or what we, the audience, thought had happened, the heroes (and the writers) were always ahead and in control.

In this movie, physical superheroes stumble from one impossible situation to the next, and survive by sheer luck, like rolling in front of a taxi (or was it a bus) while fighting the bad guy, conveniently killing him.

The direction was quite awful. What, please, was the purpose of the pre-credit sequence? The movie would have worked better without it. Way better. Things like this work in a TV show, where there's no time, but not in a two-hour movie. The camera was used in the nowadays so prevalent, but still awful, shaky-cam-close-up style. Which reduced it pretty much in a mediocre mess. What's the point of setting a story all over the world and making the movie look like it was filmed on a back lot? Considering the talent available to Abrams (Vic Armstrong as stunt coordinator? The Vic Armstrong?), nothing ended up being shown. Gone seem the times when directors appreciated the talent of stunt people, location scouts and casting director. Speaking of casting, this movie was one of the most sexist I've seen. All kinds of male body shapes, but ALL the females were of the extreme skinny model type. Frankly, I want to see shapely women. To me, no hotness here. (There was scene, when the 'hot' heroine pulled out something strapped to her thigh. Classical gratuitous sexy scene, right? Not with this stick figure. Shudder.)

I have a very bad feeling for "Star Trek XI".

Stealth (2005)

Pleasantly surprised

[8/10 · 27 July 2005]

Just coming back from a preview, I find myself pleasantly surprised by this movie. The Special FX are among the best I've ever seen; according to the end credits, they're not pure CGI, but also miniatures. But don't ask me where they're hidden, the illusion is perfect. The main cast is fairly competent (Jessica Biel is as hot as the PG-13 rating allows!), the supporting cast (Joe Morton, Richard Roxburgh, Sam Shepard) top-notch.

The story is nothing special, everything has been done before. The science is laughable (especially when it comes to the range, fuel consumption and speeds of the planes), but that's not surprising. However, director Rob Cohen pleasantly evades a lot of clichés of modern action films. No one outruns an explosion, and while the heroes shoot a lot of baddies, they miss some and they're not depicted as super marksmen. The story-telling is fast, without using too much hectic editing or shaky-cam all over the place. When it's there, it's there for a reason.

The movie would make an excellent TV series pilot, and I predict that there will be one (maybe after a sequel, if the movie is successful). Hint: Stay until after the end credits.

PS: According to the end credit, the movie was shot anamorphic in Panavision. This last true widescreen format has become so seldom that any usage is worth mentioning.

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

One of the best thought through movies.

[9/10 · 4 November 1999]

I disagree completely with all the people, who criticize the film, because there's nothing really bad in it. George Lucas and all of the others worked very hard on TPM, and it shows. After seeing the film a couple of times, I am more and more amazed, how good the script is. GL really thought all details through to make an entertaining experience, and there ARE NO PLOT HOLES. I know that a lot of people out there disagree with me on that, but all of the little problems a lot of people have with the plot can be explained with a little thought, and I believe that GL really thought everything through -- he just didn't tell us the whole story. What surprised me was the German dubbing -- it's really good, and sometimes even better than the original version (I've seen both). Unfortunately we all have to wait too long for the next two episodes...

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

The best (Anti-) war film I ever saw

[10/10 · 4 November 1999]

I remember very good my feelings when I first saw the soldiers standing in the landing boat at the beginning--if I were born 40 or 50 years earlier, I could've been standing there myself, and I could feel the horror all of those men must have felt.

A lot of people call this film too US-centered, but I thought the film did every soldier in WWII justice. There were no good or bad soldiers in it, just poor fellows in one of the worst possible situation a young man can find himself in.

I could identify with every one of the guys in the platoon. If I would been forced into military service now, I would end up like Tom Hanks' character.

Someone wrote that the movie praises the USA for fighting good wars by showing the star spangled banner at the beginning and the end. Well, I didn't understood it that way. Could one really be proud of a country, who forces his young men into such a hell?

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

What's this film about?

[5/10 · 4 November 1999]

That's what I thought after I watched the film. What's it about? Is there a some kind of message in there? I actually quite liked it while I watched it, but then the end came. Clooney and Lewis on the parking lot before the Titty Twister, and the thinking set in. The film made absolutely no sense, and I don't think I will watch it again, which is probably the worst thing I can think of saying about a film. I know that a lot of people think of Quentin Tarantino as a good author--well, i don't believe he is. A good film script consists of roughly two parts--a plot and the dialogues. Tarantino is good on the latter, no doubt there, but none of his films have a really good plot. Pulp Fiction was a handful of filmed short stories thrown together, without much sense if they would fit together. From Dusk till Dawn was worse--the pulp-fiction-like first half and the vampire slaughter fest in the second just didn't fit together. At one point I thought I spotted some kind of message in this piece of crap--when Harvey Keitel's character revealed his loss of faith and had to believe to go out and fight the vampires, but Tarantino never worked it out. And the end I felt cheated--I have lost two hours of life which won't come back. There's nothing in this film i can recommend--not even the special effects were really good. They were technically OK, but the design was just crap, senseless, and not thought through, just like the rest of it.