Change Your Image
Indianbear
Reviews
J. Edgar (2011)
Eastwood has finally hit bottom.
I can't give this thing a real review. Do do so would indicate that it is an actual film worthy of comment, which it is not. Rather than ship it to movie theaters in film cans. it should have been sent to Walmart printed on toilet paper. That way it would have ended up where it belongs.
Eastwood has been revealing more and more of his personal agenda in the films he directs. He took his first leap out of his own closet where he was pretending to be a director of quality films with his release of that female boxer flick. In that one he treated us to the idea that if you really care about someone you'll kill them if they're unhappy. That way you'll be seen as a real compassionate person and your pal won't have to be unhappy any more.
In this, his latest bucket of sewage, he takes all the gossip, rumors and outright lies about J. Edgar Hoover and portrays them as if they were absolute fact. Eastwood knows the power and impact of film to imprint any message you want on the minds of the viewers. At that, he is a master. Millions of people will now believe that Edgar was a cross dressing homosexual who was dominated by his mother. After all, "I seen it in the movies; it's gotta be true." You'll get more factual information about J. Edgar in the one page Wickipedia bio than in Eastwood's entire work of pulp fiction. The Wickipedia page makes it clear that while J. Edgar was indeed slandered by many, those that were closest to him knew he was straight.
J. Edgar had a couple of love affairs (with women) that lasted many years. The cross dressing BS is childishly ridiculous. To think that the man who practically invented investigative secrecy was so stupid in his private life that he would let others see him running around in drag is beyond intelligent belief.
The real point of this exercise in license to lie is so that Eastwood can do his bit to forward the homosexual agenda of acceptability. He portrays J. Edgar and Clyde Tolson, Edgar's best and closed friend for many years, as "sweet and sticky" homosexual lovers. The end result being that the audience is taught that homosexuals can have lifelong loving relationships just like a straight husband and wife.
Whether you or I agree with that is not the point. The point is that the film previews and advance press releases completely misrepresented the actual content. The previews promised an inside view of the real life of J. Edgar. What we got was another Eastwood mash up of his personal points of view.
My disappoint in DiCaprio for appearing in this low grade San Francisco skin flick is beyond measure. He takes a dump on his own career in full view of the audience. Man, I've never seen worse.
Eastwood has had his last dollar from me. The man has finally revealed himself to be a moral bankrupt. Not for what he believes, but for the way he lies to and manipulates his fans for his own purposes.
No more for me, Clint. You did not "make my day."
Rampart (2011)
A long look into Hollywood's trash can.
I can't give anything resembling a real movie review because this thing is not a movie.
It starts nowhere, it goes nowhere and it ends nowhere.
It's just a long pathetic look at the life of a dirty cop who's living a dirty life and doing dirty things. Gee, what fun.
It will probably win a couple of Academy Awards. Why? Because it's everything that most of Hollywood seems to love today. It's what they laughingly call "reality." This film is another proof that Hollywood has lost all contact with the concept of entertainment. This goober is entertainment like root canal is a good replacement for a trip to Disneyland.
Woody is undoubtedly proud of his performance. The truth is that he should hang his head in shame for having anything to do with this bucket of garbage.
I guess I have to face the facts. When Cecil B. Demille died he took Hollywood with him. It doesn't look like we're going to get it back anytime soon.
A Very Mary Christmas (2010)
A sweet, slightly off kilter, joyous little film.
Comfortable as old shoes, Expecting Mary is a feel good movie about family, finding friends in the strangest places, the importance of babies and in general, just surviving the life.
I was very pleasantly surprised with this little gem. For my taste, many movies categorized as comedies nowadays, simply aren't. Given, there are a lot of different styles of comedy.
Expecting Mary is not a double over in your seat, fall down laughing kind of comedy. It's a movie that makes you smile almost all the time you're watching it, with frequent intervals of chuckling and a few genuine laughs out loud. As I said, it's comfortable.
You'll see some familiar stars playing very different kinds of characters than you're used to. I wish Cloris Leachman's part had been bigger. She plays the best, and funniest, un-motherly mother I've ever seen. If you think Della Reese was typecast as all sugar and sweetness in Touched by an Angel, wait till you see her playing against her image as the grumpy owner of the strangest trailer park you've ever seen. The young actress Olesya Rulin that has the star roll playing Mary was new to me. She lives out her part as the pregnant runaway teenager in such a real and heart touching way that you'll hardly believe she's acting. I'll be looking for more from her. I don't want to give it away, but Elliot Gould is a real hoot as the Jewish truck driver.
With respect to all, for me the real star of the film was Linda Gray. She plays Darnell; the slightly mature Vegas show girl that befriends Mary. Darnell chooses to see life as something good, no matter what. She may not be the brightest bulb on the Christmas lights but she lives her life believing for the best; a true optimist in the finest sense. Wait for her last scene in the movie when she is walking the pig. That one made it for me. It's a wonderful way to pass about an hour and a half. You'll make a whole lot of new friends.
You Don't Know Jack (2010)
I bet Obama LOVES this movie!
In producing "You Don't Know Jack" Hollywood pulled out all the stops. Overflowing with talented stars and assembled by top creative forces they have projected their vision of "mercy" on the world.
Who said you can't turn straw into gold? The Hollywood propaganda factory does it all the time.
Judging the film strictly on "movie" merits, it rates 10 stars and more. Al Pacino (I'm biased) is one of my favorite actors. If he turned his talent loose on the story of a different Jack, say "Jack the Ripper" Al could make him look like a merciful Saint saving all those poor suffering women from being forced to live out the full length of their dismal lives. Now that's talent.
Susan Sarandon - again, one of my favorites. To me she has always come across as someone you would "like to have for a friend." She is just so darn "real." While there are many other talented performances in this film, Pacino is really the whole show. It's his film beginning to end. No pun intended.
Yes, I recommend the movie. It should be seen by all. If you support what Jack K. does then you will rejoice that his "story" is finally being told. If you do not support his actions then you will benefit by learning just how far the acceptance of "assisted suicide" has gone in this "land of the free and home of the brave." You can now look forward to the "pursuit of life, liberty and assisted suicide." Any illusions you have about how safe and welcome you will be in your old age will be wiped out by this little ditty. If our Hollywood friends have their way, that is.
Just for fun (after all, life is all about having "fun," right?) consider that the following three people would be prime candidates for Jack's "when the going gets tough the tough "off" themselves" philosophy.
Christopher Reeve - Christopher D'Olier Reeve (September 25, 1952 � October 10, 2004) was an American actor, director, producer, and writer. He portrayed Superman - Kal-El - Clark Kent in four films, from 1978 to 1987. In the 1980s, he also starred in several films, including Somewhere in Time (1980), Deathtrap (1982), The Bostonians (1984), and Street Smart (1987). In May 1995, Christopher Reeve was paralyzed in an accident during an equestrian competition. A quadriplegic, he could not move his arms or legs and needed a machine to help him breath. He was confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life. He lobbied on behalf of people with spinal cord injuries, and for human embryonic stem cell research after this accident. He founded the Christopher Reeve Foundation and co-founded the Reeve-Irvine Research Center. Reeve died at age 52 on October 10, 2004 from cardiac arrest caused by a systemic infection.
Helen Keller - (1880 - 1968) - Helen Adams Keller (June 27, 1880 - June 1, 1968) was an American author, activist and lecturer. She was the first deaf and blind person to graduate from college. She was not born blind and deaf; it was not until nineteen months of age that she came down with an illness described by doctors as "an acute congestion of the stomach and the brain", which could have possibly been scarlet fever or meningitis. The illness did not last for a particularly long time, but it left her deaf and blind. Keller went on to become a world-famous speaker and author. She is remembered as an advocate for people with disabilities amid numerous other causes.
Richard Pryor - Richard Franklin Lennox Thomas Pryor III (December 1, 1940 � December 10, 2005) was an American comedian, actor, and writer. He is also regarded as the most important stand-up comedian of his time. Pryor grew up in his grandmother's brothel, where his mother, Gertrude L. Thomas, practiced prostitution. His father, LeRoy "Buck" Pryor (a.k.a. Buck Carter) was a former bartender, boxer, and World War II veteran who worked as his wife's pimp. In 1991, Pryor announced that he had been suffering from multiple sclerosis since 1986. In response to giving up drugs after being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, he said: �God gave me this M.S. sh*t to save my life".
Why these three ignorant slobs held on to the illusion that life is a gift and is worth living is beyond me. Jack K. could have set them straight.
Only the Brave (2006)
Years from today, this film will be called a classic.
The impact of this very human film was staggering. I will not try to give a "technical" review of the acting or direction. It deserves better than that. The movie honors, as we all should, this special group of men who fought and died for us in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor. I saw the valor, the courage, the honor - and those qualities are important. But more important to me was the love. Yes, the love. The love of home and family. The love of one man, one human being for another. The love of friends; friends that lay down their lives for one another. The love that they were willing to die for. To their great credit the creators of Only the Brave make it without shouting one four letter word, making one obscene gesture or insulting us with one rude shot of a bodily act for so called "realism" The impact was in fact stronger with the absence of unnecessary trash. The life, the death, the struggle were realism enough. Steven Spielberg take note: you could learn a lot here. They CAN make 'em like they used to; and better.
The Happening (2008)
An "elephant" of a film.
Remember the story of the four blind men? They were walking down a road and encountered an elephant. They had never come across one before.
A passer by told them they were standing by an elephant. The first blind man walked forward, ran into the side of the elephant, and said; "an elephant is like a wall." The second blind man walked forward and came to the elephant's leg. Putting his arms around the elephants leg he said; "an elephant is like a tree." The third one took hold of the animals trunk and said; "an elephant is like a snake." The last grabbed the creatures tail and said; "an elephant is like a rope." Of such varied opinions, depending on your perspective, is the film "The Happening." I've read a lot of different views about the film, and, yes, it appears that I have a very different perspective.
First, and this is not directly about the film itself, I do not think graphic portrayals of suicide are "entertaining." I don't buy the ever increasing representation of so called "realism" that today's film makers seem to think is vital to what they are trying to communicate.
We've reached the point in our society where we can sit in darkened theaters eating popcorn, drinking Coke, and chug it all down while we're watching absolutely realistic portrayals of the most gruesome and downright sick representations of self inflicted death that you can possibly imagine.
This is our version of "feeding the Christians to the lions." I imagine the ancient Romans were also enjoying their snacks while they watched people being eaten alive by animals, burned alive etc. and indeed they also called it "entertainment." Just because we're doing it with special effects does not make us "better" than they were. What we're doing is just as much a sign of sickness, and is just as dangerous as what is portrayed in "The Happening." Our sickness is also self destructive. History has proved that; we're just not paying attention.
Regarding the movie, I honestly think that the story line itself had the same overall quality as Hitchcock's "The Birds." It they had underplayed the deaths, instead of throwing them in our faces with hot "air sick bag" graphic portrayals, it's possible they could have had a truly classic "fright film" with as one reviewer stated, the atmosphere of a "Twilight Zone" episode. Alas, it was not to be.
I'm sorry to say they missed their chance to have this film placed on the same shelf as Alfred's. Hitchcock's film will never be forgotten; this one will.
3:10 to Yuma (2007)
Nothing to "Crowe" about here.
Where's Glenn Ford when you need him? Man, this film is a stinker.
I fault myself for going to see this picture. I should have known better, but I'm a sucker for westerns; always have been. I keep hoping Hollywood will actually turn out another good one. Yea, right. Like they'll finally come to their senses and make a horse opera to equal Red River, The Man From Laramie, Shane, or Hondo.
I'm sure that most people who read reviews of this bust-out flick will read many more reviews than this one, so I'll leave it to the other honest reviewers to point out the many flaws in the story line and just plain insults to the intelligence of the audience.
Hollywood really needs to get over itself, and that surely includes Russell Crowe. He wastes a lot of time promoting the politically correct Hollywood agenda of trying to make bad guys look like good guys and good guys look like bad guys.
Crowe's gun is called "The Hand of God" and has a Crucifix on the handle. Yes Catholics, a Crucifix not just a cross. You're treated to a long camera shot of the handle just to make sure you get it.
He quotes scripture like he was vomiting curse words, he verbally spits on Christianity and Christians in general and makes sure that Jesus gets the "Hollywood Required" dose of ridicule. What cowardly tripe. The Duke would eat this guy for lunch.
The ending of the film is absolutely unbelievable. There was no satisfactory wrap up, just a complete unraveling of any pretense of a sensible story line.
P. T. Barnum was right. I sure felt like a sucker after wasting my time on this one.
Suffice to say that the best thing you could do is rent a copy of the original, take it home, pop some Redenbacher's and enjoy watching a real western.
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
DaVinci is NOT Da Bomb --- it's just a wet firecracker.
It has been said that when God created man, he put definite limits on his intelligence but no limits on his stupidity.
Dan Brown with both his book and now this flaccid excuse for a movie has certainly proved that to be correct.
He's got to be laughing his rear end off at all of us; all the way to the bank.
Here's a guy who wrote a novel (if you can call that collection of mangled sentences a novel) that did little more than express his distorted personal views of a God he doesn't believe in and his distaste for people who do believe.
Take Adolph Hitler's hatred of Jews in "Mein Kampf," add a weak story line and call it a novel and you'll have what Dan Brown did with his hatred of Jesus Christ, the Bible, Christians in general and Catholics in particular in "The DaVinci Code." I'll give him credit for one thing though; he's a master of the BIG LIE.
He seems to fully understand that the bigger and more outrageous a lie is, the easier it is to get people to fall for it. P. T. Barnum understood that and made a career out of telling big lies in a humorous way. It worked. The public was entertained and he got rich in the process.
By comparison, Dan Brown's big lies are neither humorous nor entertaining, they're just lies; period.
Regarding those who have the audacity to protest against Dan's lies, (like the people that were standing across the street from the movie theater holding signs) the DaVinci disciples are fond of saying "Hey, get a grip. It's just FICTION!" As if that makes it all OK. With that kind of thinking you can then tell any lie you want about anyone you want; call it fiction, and you can get away with it -- right?
Try this one on for size. Someone writes a novel about your family; your mother, father etc. and all the people you love and respect. In the novel your family members and all your friends are called whores, liars, thieves, and murders. When you protest, you're told "Get a grip!! It's just FICTION!" I wonder if you would accept it as such; ya think?
Yea, I know. The book was a mildly interesting murder mystery. If that had been translated to the screen, perhaps it could have been given at least two stars for entertainment value. Not so.
This flick is so dull you'll need a six pack of "Jolt" just to stay awake. People in the audience actually snickered at some of the supposedly most serious and dramatic moments in the film.
I really can't give it much of a review at all; it was just too over hyped, too long, too weak and too dull to even deserve commenting on.
I can't grace this slug of a film with anything more than one star. I guess Ron and Tom needed the money. If you value yours, stay home and watch a rerun of "Shoes of the Fisherman." It inspires something a lot more productive than Dan's hokum does; that fer sure.
What's next? Maybe Dan will follow this up with a novel about Mother Theresa of Calcutta. Yea, "The Calcutta Code." In it he'll give us the inside scoop on how Mother Theresa was actually a conspirator and together with today's descendants of DaVinci she was really planning to take over the world. All that business of helping the poor for over forty years was just a cover up.
Like Dan, Ron and Tom will laugh all the way to the bank. Why? Because almost no one will pay any attention to the negative (but honest) reviews of this dog and they'll still cough up their bucks at the box office window.
This overflowing hog trough will probably be nominated for six or seven academy awards. Sigh. Go figure.
Million Dollar Baby (2004)
It's not about life, it's about death.
Clint Eastwood has been (in past years) a favorite of mine. I've enjoyed his westerns and many other films he's starred in.
When it comes to this film I'm reminded of the old saying "You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
Well, judging from the percentage of positive reviews, both on this site and in the newspapers, Clint has indeed come pretty close to "fooling all of the people all of the time" with this one.
The first two thirds of Million Dollar Baby is indeed a great fight film. It's uplifting and satisfying in every sense of the word. If Clint had stopped there I would also have been writing a review that drips with honey, as so many of my peers have done.
But he doesn't stop there. He glues a lengthy stretch of additional celluloid onto a great fight film to promote his personal belief in euthanasia. He sells, and sells hard, the idea that killing Maggie is a good, kind, and loving act. After all, who wants to live as a paraplegic?
I wonder what the late Christopher Reeves would have said about this had he seen the film? I rather think the good Mr. Reeves would have spit in Clint's eye.
When it comes out on DVD be sure and show this film to every crippled person you know. In particular the paraplegics who "fight the good fight" every day. It will cheer them right up.
If it were only a boxing film I would rate it 10 stars, it's terrific. But as it's really an "ambush" film promoting Clint's personal belief in euthanasia, I give it no stars at all.
Starsky & Hutch (2004)
They didn't have a clue.
Being older than dirt, I remember Starsky and Hutch the TV series. It was a good show; not spectacular, but good. You always knew what to expect of the dynamic cop duo; plenty of action, girls with short skirts, super chase scenes and a supporting cast of interesting and fun characters.
I looked forward to seeing the movie version. I thought it would be fun to take a step back in time and bust the bad guys with "the boys" while remembering afros and mini-skirts.
Not so.
In the first five minutes of the show they make it clear that this version of Starsky and Hutch has little or no connection with the original.
Like most of today's script writing cowards they fill everyone's mouth with plenty of unnecessary and stupidly expressed curse words. The result is boorish and far less than intelligent dialog. It's entirely out of place in this "time sensitive" material.
While introducing the two main characters, we learn that Hutch is no longer an honest hard working cop; he is now a thief. He's still a cop, but in his opening scene we witness him committing a robbery. When he gets busted by officers in blue, he protects himself by saying he's "under cover."
That pretty well did it for me. I was outa there.
Hollywood has been on the "no real heroes allowed" track for a number of years now. It was a bad idea when they started it with Paul Newman playing a so called anti-hero in Hud. Like a rotting corpse the concept has only become more rancid with age.
Sorry guys. A bad cop is a bad cop. He's not a good guy and he's not a hero. In this case he's nothing more than an example of how far out of touch Hollywood has become with the reality of good vs. evil. Good is good and evil is evil. There are no "anti-heroes." The concept is nothing more than a self-serving celluloid illusion.
Watch and enjoy the re-runs on TV, but as regards this lame re-make, keep your money in your pocket. Save it for something more worthy of your hard earned dollars.
Open Range (2003)
Broke my heart.
Man, was I ever ready for this movie. Raised on old time westerns I'm a great fan of "real" westerns and could hardly believe my luck when I read the reviews for Open Range. "Whoa, happy days are here again!" I waited with finger drumming impatience for it to show up on my local screen. When it finally arrived I laid rubber burning my way to the front of the ticket line.
With a wash tub full of hot buttered popcorn and my trusty half gallon diet coke at the ready, I plopped myself down and practically hyper ventilated waiting for the film to start.
After the first few scenes flashed before my eyes, I just knew I was going to see a winner. Gee, the great vistas of the old west, the weather beaten tried and true friends of the saddle, faithful horses, six guns, what more could you ask?
If I had any concerns about the quality of the film, I dropped them after the first few minutes. I was so comfortable I almost felt the spirits of Alan Ladd (Shane) and Gary Cooper (High Noon) sitting next to me nodding their approval.
Then ------------------- the ambush.
It happened early on during the graveside scene. One of the hired hands had been killed. Costner and Duvall were struggling with their loss. More than just a paid saddle buster he was a friend of theirs. Their sadness and anger was evident. When Costner asked Duvall about God (the equivalent of the old "say a few words" scene) Duvall says "I'm not talking to that --- -- - -----!"
Those words, a curse directed straight at God, hit me like a baseball bat in the face. My feeling for the film, and it's characters, died a sudden death.
Over the years I've viewed scenes like that in dozens of films. The lost friend, the graveside remarks, the stammered prayers etc. Or, if the film expressed the sentiments of a "I ain't got no use for God" type of character, it had always been done with good strong script writing; nothing like the weak, cheap shot taken by Duvall.
The "doin' it all on my own" type of character was perhaps best played by John Wayne in "The Searchers." Again, at the graveside, when they were burying the victims of the Indian raid and Wayne's character had had enough of it, he burst out with an angry "Put an amen to it. There's no more time for prayin'."
Everyone in the audience knew what he meant and he didn't have to "cuss God" to get his point across. We all knew he wasn't a Christian; he was mad as hell, and he just wanted to get on with the business of hunting down the killers. Fair enough.
As Hollywood has relentlessly worked to erase all lines of moral standards, filth and vulgarity has become common place in films of all genres, not just the infrequent western.
But in Open Range, I was led to believe I would see a throwback to the old days of clear cut lines between good and evil, a real old fashioned horse opera. I was totally unprepared for Duvall's cursing of God to come vomiting it's way out of the screen directly into my face. Once again, as has been happening with increasing frequency, I was ambushed by Hollywood's hatred of God.
They have perfected the technique. First, the film relaxes you. Hey, you're there to enjoy yourself. You let down your barriers and let the film wash over you. You become engrossed in the characters and sympathetic to their plight. Then it happens. The ambush. Out of nowhere, the Hollywood anti-Christian agenda gets written into the plot and the unwary viewer, gets slammed with it full in the kisser.
I watched the rest of the film in sort of a numbed inner silence. No, the quality of the rest of the film did not justify or excuse the insult to God; not to mention the insult to those of us who do our best to serve and love Him.
The message sent was clear. God, if he exists at all is unfair. Good guys don't like God. End of Hollywoods sermon.
I left the theater feeling disappointed and discouraged. After "Dances With Wolves" from Costner and "The Disciple" from Duvall, I thought I could trust the two of them for a quality film in Open Range. Well partner, I was wrong.
Think I'm making too big a deal about a miserable line or two of dialog?
Try this on for size. You walk into a diner, sit down and order a bowl of chili. The guy behind the counter informs you "We were just inspected by the health department and they found a few rat t---ds back in the kitchen. It wasn't much. We estimate there is only one or two of them in every bowl of chili. You want one?" Yea, right.
Kevin, Robert, there were one too many rat t--ds in Open Range for me. You had a chance to go down in history. You traded it for a sack of greenbacks and a chance to shoot your mouth off. Yes, I know that standards, if you can still call them that, have changed. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Next time, if you find it difficult to exercise a little mature self restraint, at least try to find a little more respect for your audience. Or just hire a better script writer.
My rating for Open Range is two out of five stars.