Reviews

14 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Eh...I've seen worse, but I've seen better too
19 September 2014
First things first: Paul Simon is a brilliant songwriter, but a lousy actor. He was absolutely dreadful in "Annie Hall," but at least that was a brief performance, clearly done as a lark for Woody Allen.

I'm not sure what, exactly, this movie was supposed to be. Was it a straight drama? A satire on the music business? A conjecture as to what Simon's career would have been like had "Sounds of Silence" been his only hit? All of they above? In any case, it's not a bad movie. Simon's scriptwriting is actually quite a bit more astute than his acting. But mostly, it's a formless vanity project, mostly a vehicle for Simon to show off his formidable guitar playing/songwriting skills...and, it must be said, his 40-year-old body (through plentiful shirtless and open-shirt scenes), which I have to admit is quite impressive, especially given his short stature.

Simon is actually quite sexy in this movie: the sad-sack, world-weary persona he affects (or maybe it's genuine) somehow really works for him. And I loved the inside joke of his character encountering a poster for "The Empire Strikes Back," aka the movie that Simon's then-girlfriend, Carrie Fisher, was starring in around the same time "One Trick Pony" was being filmed.

Blair Brown is perfectly decent as the Simon-equivalent's ex-wife, although Ms. Brown has subsequently said she dislikes the movie and doesn't wish to discuss it.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Tortured (2010)
1/10
What a stupid movie
18 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This is bad even for torture porn. It starts out promisingly enough, with Jesse Metcalfe understandably freaking out about the abduction of his small son, but once Erika Christensen shows up, she promptly drains any semblance of liveliness that this outing may have had (which, admittedly, wasn't much). Christensen is, with rare exceptions, simply a lousy actress. And she's uncommonly awful here. Neither she nor Metcalfe -- who isn't bad, just bland -- is even slightly believable as parents so vengeful that they'd kidnap and torture the man (they think) murdered their son.

Oh yeah, that parenthetical means that at the end there's a shocking twist. Not. As others have noted, you see it coming from a mile away: the boy's parents may have seized the wrong guy, because there were TWO prisoners on the transport van they are able to hijack with idiotic ease (a fact they apparently weren't aware of -- yeah, right), and somehow we're supposed to think they might mistake the guy they abduct with the man they saw for months on end during his trial.

Matters aren't helped by a truly stupid script and mostly lifeless direction. Of course, people aren't going to watch something like this for the script, acting or direction: they want to see a revenge fantasy played out, which the movie doesn't even deliver due to the aforementioned "twist." The movie swiftly becomes quite boring, and yes, I am including the torture scenes in that assessment.

This is not guilty-pleasure bad. It's just bad.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bachelorette (2012)
9/10
Kirsten Dunst is really good
2 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Actually, all three of the female leads -- Dunst, Isla Fisher, and Lizzy Caplan -- are really good, but I was surprised at how well Dunst carried her role. I've seen a lot of praise for her performance in "Melancholia," but I think her performance in this movie is better -- it just isn't taken as seriously because it's a comedic role, and because her character in this movie is such a bitch.

To which I say, yes, she's a bitch, but none of the characters in the movie -- save for maybe the bride and groom -- are what I'd call nice people. They all have their problems, but Dunst's Regan is ahead of all of them in one respect: she sees the truth, and knows when to tell it, as well as when not to. She takes her role as Maid of Honor seriously, and thus she knows that Becky, the bride, needs to be told what she wants to hear instead of the truth. As such, she is a damn good Maid of Honor, as well as, in the end, a good friend -- she issues verbal abuse when appropriate and she takes verbal abuse when appropriate. She saves her ditzy, drama-queen fellow bridesmaid Katie from overdosing on Xanax by matter-of-factly shoving her fingers down Katie's throat to make her vomit. She lies through her teeth to Becky and other wedding participants to cover the butts of incompetent others as well as her own. And when the wedding proceeds despite many hitches, she can't help but get misty-eyed at a job well done.

Dunst is now and probably forever best known as the ingenue from the "Spiderman" films, but this serves as a reminder that she's actually quite a fine actress.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
My Bodyguard (1980)
10/10
Sweet, funny and touching
15 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
What with the recent headlines about extreme bullying in school, this film is eerily prescient.

Chris Makepeace, as the primary target of a mean bully at his new high school, gives a strong, warm performance that makes one wish he hadn't virtually disappeared from the acting scene. I think he could have had as good a career as his co-star Matt Dillon (who plays the bully). As it is, he makes his character easy to root for. When he enlists the "bodyguard" services of Adam Baldwin as the sullen school outcast (who is feared as a psychopath because of his size and because he was rumored to have killed his younger brother), the two forge a beautifully written friendship that you rarely see in movies anymore. Makepeace also finds out from a very kind teacher/counselor that Baldwin's younger brother accidentally shot himself, and that trauma is why Baldwin is so withdrawn.

Of course, Makepeace can only rely on Baldwin's protection for so long, because Baldwin isn't really a psychopath. Dillon shows up with a bigger, tougher guy as HIS bodyguard, and Makepeace watches helplessly as Baldwin allows himself to be beaten and humiliated. Afterward, he asks Baldwin, "Why didn't you fight?", because he's honestly puzzled. Baldwin spits, "I never wanted to be anybody's damn bodyguard anyway!" Later he reveals the painful truth about his younger brother: that he did actually shoot the boy. It was an accident, but he is racked with guilt over it. The scene has heartbreaking acting not just from Baldwin but from Makepeace.

Eventually the two reconcile, and Baldwin decides to confront Dillon and his bodyguard. At first Baldwin pretends he's going to back down again, and then in a great moment that always makes me cheer, lets out a primal howl as he bodily flings himself on top of the larger guy and proceeds to pound on him. He wins that battle, but there's still another: between Dillon and Makepeace. Baldwin urges Makepeace to fight for himself, and he does, breaking Dillon's nose and revealing what a coward Dillon truly is.

The film's ending is great: Baldwin trailing after Makepeace and jokingly asking him to be his bodyguard.

Wonderful film. It deserves more recognition.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Listen to the DVD commentary -- it's more entertaining than the movie
18 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Yes, I wasted my time watching this flick, and then listening to the commentary. But the commentary is actually fairly entertaining. I was surprised the actors would agree to do it; one would think that they would want to forget the embarrassment of showing up in this tripe as soon as possible. But they actually seem to be having a good time on the commentary -- poking fun at the movie's dumbness, but also poking fun at some of the more head-scratching aspects of "300," such as the "bottomless pit of death," where misogynistic Persian messengers and the like can be maneuvered into standing in front of with bizarre and improbable ease.

Kevin Sorbo, who is the sole reason I sat through this pile of stupidity -- he's actually a pretty decent comedic actor, and though he has gotten a bit craggy since the end of "Hercules," he's still way hotter than any man his age has a right to be -- provides a few of the movie's mildly funny moments, and also some of the commentary's humor. It helps that he always sounds amused, no matter what he's saying.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Lovely, well-acted movie
6 March 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Keisha Castle-Hughes is without question one of the best actresses of her generation, and here she plays Mary, mother of Jesus, with an almost eerie authenticity. Though Castle-Hughes is in fact Maori, she definitely looks like the real Mary likely would have looked: small, olive-complected, with dark curly hair. I've seen many a portrait of or movie about Mary in which she was improbably tall, blond, and blue-eyed.

The physical accuracy of the central characters is across the board. All first-century Jews are portrayed by actors who look like first-century Jews probably looked.

The movie itself is a painstakingly accurate adaptation of Jesus' conception and birth as told in the first four gospels of the New Testament, but beyond that, it is actually a very sweet, if indirect, love story. Mary is betrothed to Joseph before she conceives Jesus, and she questions why she has been promised to a man she does not love and in fact barely knows.

But after she reveals her pregnancy and gets to know Joseph, she sees that he is a good, kind, and unselfish man. During their trek to Bethlehem, she realizes (when gently wiping down his feet, bloodied from their long trek, as he sleeps) how strong and stoic he is, not to mention how fiercely protective he is of her and her unborn child, even in the face of the humiliating fact that the child is not his. And when the baby is born -- in a truly dazzling sequence which involves the Star of Bethlehem shining on the precise spot of the birth -- Joseph holds up the baby, laughing with joy as if it were his own son.

This is not the most exciting movie ever made, but it is definitely worth watching.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Adorable cartoon
12 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This cartoon marks the first appearance of a very popular Looney Toons duo: Marc Anthony, the seemingly tough bulldog, and Pussyfoot, the eternally calm kitten. It's often cited by Looney Toons fans as a favorite, and watching it, one can easily see why. Marc Anthony is like a little kid, hiding his new kitten from his owner, who has scolded him about bringing in his ratty toys and scattering them all over the house. It makes for some hilarious misbehavior, and even more hilarious facial expressions from Marc Anthony as he fakes his owner out each time she almost finds the kitten.

The most memorable part is when Marc Anthony, who mistakenly believes the kitten got mixed in with the cookie batter his owner is making up (as we saw, but he didn't, the kitten jumped out of the bowl and went off to clean itself), watches at the window as the batter is rolled out, cut into cookies, and put in the oven, fainting each time. He then starts howling in grief, until his owner lets him back in. Noting his "long face," she gives him a cookie...and it's shaped like a kitten! But as if this isn't heartbreaking enough, Marc Anthony takes it with a trembling paw, then puts it on his back like he carried the kitten before he starts howling in grief again.

Boy, they milk every single bit of pathos out of that scene before the kitten finally comes up and mews.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Excellent, moving, beautiful
27 September 2005
Though I am a San Francisco Bay Area native, I have no memory of Harvey Milk's career, being as I was only 6 when he was assassinated. However, watching this film made me feel as if I was there, seeing everything as it happened. It truly is that powerful and involving.

Director Robert Epstein skillfully alternate between archival news footage and interviews with Milk's friends and associates, who recall him with warmth and affection. This isn't a hagiography (Milk was, as his former campaign manager notes, hot-tempered and sometimes very hard to work with), it's merely a straightforward portrait of a fascinating and inspirational man.

Harvey Milk was charming, intelligent, articulate, and above all, tenacious. It was largely due to his efforts and those of his supporters that the Briggs Initiative, which would've restricted the rights of gay teachers, was defeated in California. Though gay rights were understandably his biggest issue, he also fought for other disenfranchised groups, and shrewdly recognized that they should all come together as one to fight for human rights. He also presciently recognized the very real possibility that he could be murdered, and taped a statement which he requested be played only in the event of his death by assassination. It's eerie to listen to it, not least because he speaks in such a matter-of-fact way.

Epstein provides a surprising amount of balance with regards to Dan White, who shot both Milk and George Moscone. He certainly doesn't have sympathy with White's actions, but he makes sure to note that White had devoted his whole life to public service, that he gave up a secure job as a fireman to take a low-paying job as district supervisor, then quit in frustration. Nonetheless, his disgust for the ridiculously light sentence White received for murdering Milk and Moscone is palpable, and one interviewee posits that had White murdered only Moscone, he'd have been in San Quentin for the rest of his life.

White, by the way, committed suicide a year after being released from prison. Epstein thought about changing the ending of the film in order to mention this fact, but decided that to do so would be to shift the focus too much to White. The subject of this movie is Harvey Milk, and it's a beautiful tribute to him.

I do have one criticism: the filmmakers don't clear up the matter of the so-called "Twinkie defense," in which psychiatrists who testified for Dan White's defense allegedly claimed that his consumption of junk food was what caused his depression (which, his attorneys argued, was what led him to go on his killing rampage). What the psychiatrists actually claimed was that White consumption of junk food was a symptom, not the cause, of his depression.
26 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
So bad I couldn't even laugh at it
4 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I admit, I have a strange fondness for bad movies. Movies that are enjoyably bad, or movies that really aren't as bad as the critics/public insisted, though they're certainly not good.

However, there are some movies so irredeemably, stupefyingly, unimaginably bad that they don't even have the semi-out of being funny. "Megiddo" is one such movie.

I sat through it because I was bored and it was an exceedingly dismal night for TV. And even though I didn't pay to see it, I still want my money back. What a turkey.

The plot, if you can call it that, is a mishmash of rah-rah super-patriotism, shockingly blatant racism and xenophobia, paranoia, pseudo-Biblical gibberish, "Omen" ripoffs, "X-Files" ripoffs, "Exorcist" ripoffs, a pitiful love triangle, hideous acting, even more hideous dialog, and cut-rate special effects that offer a silly Satan who's about as frightening as a pair of bunny slippers -- as well as being shockingly stupid. I guess I'm just used to the idea of the devil being brilliant, but still...you'd think that old Scratch would at least be clever enough to deduce that one of his "allies," reluctant to start with, is going to back-stab him.

All this talk about Beelzebub, and no mention of the actor who plays him. It's Michael York, hammier than a pig farm. Many an actor has said that they prefer to play villains, as they're more fun than heroes, so you'd think that York would be having a blast playing the ultimate villain. However, his performance seems to strain him as much as it does the audience. Just like his computer-animated counterpart, who shows up at the very end, he isn't scary. He's just peevish and annoying.

Poor Michael Biehn (who hasn't aged well at all -- he used to be so cute) is stuck playing the good guy, York's "brother." I use quotes because I think that that the devil actually inhabits York's character when he's a child and uses him as a puppet, though I'm not sure...the movie is muddy on this point, as on so many others. Anyway, Biehn's performance mainly consists of looking constipated, barking out painfully stupid dialog, and clenching his jaw...perhaps to keep from dissolving into gales of laughter at the sheer absurdity of all that is going on around him. I suppose it is to his credit that he doesn't, in fact, collapse in hilarity; he must take his craft seriously, even when applying it to something this appalling.
21 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ellen DeGeneres: Here and Now (2003 TV Special)
8/10
Very funny
10 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
It's become hip in many circles to say how unfunny Ellen Degeneres is, that she only gets attention because she's a lesbian, that if she was male and straight, no one would pay to see her stand-up act. I think that's flatly untrue. Ellen isn't a laugh a minute -- sometimes she drags out bits much too long -- but overall she is quite funny. She picks apart minutiae with sharp but never mean-spirited wit, and doesn't use curse words (well, that's not entirely true; I recall her using the s-word once in a previous televised stand up routine), and makes us all laugh at our own silliness.

My favorite bits are "pickle juice in your eye," "We are so comfortable with that uncomfortable feeling," and "She tripped -- no, she's running. No, she tripped. YOU TRIPPED!"
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Man in the Iron Mask (1977 TV Movie)
9/10
Richard Chamberlain is excellent
3 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Richard Chamberlain had already proved himself a fine actor before starring in this TV production of "The Man in the Iron Mask," but here he truly gives the performance of a lifetime. Performances, I should say, because he plays two different (VERY different) roles: King Louis XIV and his long lost twin brother, Phillippe.

Louis is a spoiled, infantile (his courtiers know perfectly well to deliberately lose at croquet lest they "risk another tantrum") and often cruel man, who lives in splendor while his subjects starve. He treats his long-suffering wife like garbage, openly flirting with and carrying on other women, and at one point he even viciously rips her wig off in public after calling her a "mountain of sallow flesh." Not surprisingly, no one likes Louis all that much; even his mother is hard pressed to say anything nice about him.

Meanwhile, Phillippe, totally unaware of his relation to Louis, is mysteriously kidnapped from his cozy home and thrown into the Bastille. But it's not what you think -- his kidnappers are the ageing Three Musketeers, who, fed up with their "water lily" of a ruler, have a plan to oust him and replace him with his identical twin, Phillippe. (Though Phillippe was born first and is therefore the rightful king, they insist that he rule as Louis XIV because of France's instability.) The Bastille was a "safe place" to stash Phillippe, or so they thought; at least two people, upon accidentally seeing Phillippe, are struck by his resemblance to Louis. One of them reports to Fouquet, the king's closest adviser. Upon verifying Phillippe's identity, Fouquet breaks the news to Louis, who, quite rightly fearing usurpation, hatches a cruel plan: imprisoning Phillippe for life in a run down castle in a distant part of France. But even that isn't enough: "No one must look upon his face," Louis tells Fouquet. Hence the iron mask, which is locked upon poor Phillippe in a gut-wrenching sequence.

The rest of the movie is about the Three Musketeers rescuing Phillippe, telling him the truth, and proceeding ahead with their plans. Meanwhile, Phillippe falls in love with Louise, a pretty lady of the court who the king is also unsuccessfully trying to romance (and as it turns out, Fouquet likewise tried to romance, and when she spurned his advances, he had her father thrown in the Bastille), and there's plenty of wonderfully intricate plotting.

While the performances are strong all around (except for maybe Jenny Agutter as Louise), it's Richard Chamberlain who carries the entire movie. Phillippe starts out an ordinary person, but his grotesque mistreatment starts to make him almost savage. Not surprisingly, the desire for revenge burns white-hot inside him, and he finally gets to realize it at the end. He also has a remarkable moment when, after having assumed Louis XIV's identity, he meets his mother for the first time: he is so emotional that he can barely get the words out, yet manages to cover it by telling her how beautiful she looks. The queen mother, who of course doesn't know his true identity, beams and says, "My Louis?" as if wondering that maybe now she can finally truly love her son.

Meanwhile, his turn as Louis is admirably restrained. Most actors would not be able to resist chewing the scenery while playing such a vile, decadent character, but Chamberlain instead gives a nuanced, surprisingly subtle performance. Louis is thoroughly despicable, and Chamberlain is clearly having fun playing such a juicy villain, but he doesn't go over the top.

Patrick McGoohan also shines as the clever, vain, heartless Fouquet. He often speaks in a type of growl that reminds me of Jeremy Irons, and his refined sadism is chilling to watch. It makes it all the more satisfying that, in the end, Fouquet is deceived by a simple seamster -- and that he himself is the one who seals his own fate by incorrectly naming Louis as the pretender.
23 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Another inaccurate adaptation
27 March 2005
One thing I simply don't understand is why Hollywood has so much trouble adapting the books of Laura Ingalls Wilder with some degree of accuracy. Her life was fascinating; why do they feel they need to take such artistic license in order to dramatize everything? This attempt is better than its predecessors (the Michael Landon TV series, which skidded completely off the tracks after a few seasons; the DREADFUL "Beyond the Prairie" TV movies), but that's not saying much. I do think the parts were fairly well cast, but I wondered: where's baby Carrie? I can only assume she'll be born in a future episode, or not at all. Either way, her exclusion is annoying. So too was the use of the word "blonde" to describe Mary's hair color. The word used in all the books was "golden." Also, why are Caroline's (Ma) parents still alive? They'd both been dead for years by the time the Ingalls family started their trek west. If they wanted a big, tearful scene where the grandparents say goodbye, they could've used Charles's (Pa) parents instead.

Oh well. Better luck next time.
7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Lousy and completely inaccurate
16 March 2005
First of all, Laura was a brunette, not a blonde. In fact, she deeply envied her older sister Mary's "golden" hair and wished her own could be that color. (I will give this adaptation some small credit, though -- at least they didn't have Mary get married and lose two children like the TV series did.) Second of all, the reason Almanzo decided to call Laura "Bessie" was because he had a sister named Laura and never cared for the name, and Laura, whose middle name was Elizabeth, repeated a rhyme about "Elizabeth, Elspeth, Betsy and Bess," rather than the dumb, badly-acted scene in this TV movie. Third of all, Laura and Almanzo's unnamed son did not die immediately after birth; he lived for a couple of weeks. Fourth of all, Laura's teacher, whom she fashioned an unkind chant about, was Almanzo's sister. Fifth of all...

Oh, to heck with it. This adaptation contains so many inaccuracies that I lost count half an hour in. It's very annoying for a movie which claims to be the true story about Mrs. Wilder. Her fascinating and often heartbreaking life deserves better than this corny, sappy, lame tripe.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Shattered Innocence (1988 TV Movie)
7/10
Surprisingly good
15 March 2005
This is a movie that could have been tawdry and exploitative, and indeed, I recall reading that the parents of Colleen Applegate (whose life this is loosely based on) were displeased with it, saying it made the pornographers look like they were just running a business and Colleen got into trouble on her own. It's not quite that simple in the movie.

The acting is good all around. Jonna Lee is convincing in all three wildly different stages of the Colleen character's (here she's called Pauleen) story: naive virgin, confident nude model, and decimated, has-been, weary porn star. Her hysterical, desperate tirade at the end is particularly noteworthy; despite the many stupid decisions she's made, in the end, you feel for her. She was really just a kid, after all.
17 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed