Change Your Image
beetree
Reviews
The Day Reagan Was Shot (2001)
A nice bit of cable drama.
The Day Reagan Was Shot follows in a long line of cable dramas that are, while not spectacular, very solid.
This movie is not so much about Reagan (adequately played by Richard Crenna - who did NOT try to impersonate the President) as it was about the Cabinet members and who was (or was not) in charge. Vice President Busch was en route to Texas as he was misinformed that President Reagan was unharmed. The trickle of power from there, portrayed by the movie, was a disaster of misinformation, genuine screw-ups and power struggles.
Though the movie tends to lean to the dramatic side, it still gives a solid effort mingling fact with played-up fiction.
If you find yourself watching this movie and wanting something a little more powerful (though much less based in fact), try two of the best political thrillers ever - THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE and SEVEN DAYS IN MAY.
6/10 - Worth a watch.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (2001)
A Little Hairy.
It is a crime for this movie to get an almost 8/10 rating and be among the top 250 on the IMDB database.
I would give this movie an 8/10 rating in regard to sticking with the book. It is one of the most faithful scripts that I have ever seen portrayed on the big screen.
As an unpublished author, I respect JK Rawlings's creation (and her drive to be published) and I have enjoyed the books immensely. The fact that this movie sticks so close to the book is actually it's down fall. There is almost no creative intervention by director Columbus and this movie is one of the few that could have used it.
The movie works better in the always fascinating "fleshing" of previously "written" characters. That is to say that all of the characters in the book, that are brought to life by the movie, are interesting to see just for that fact.
Otherwise it surprised me that this movie was such a bore. The CGI's were good - impressive even, but that failed to spark any real interest beyond, "I wonder what this-or-that character will look like".
I do not make a habit of reviewing any single plot feature on IMDB. This is covered very well by other IMDB posters that have donated their time. But I can say this, I was embarrassed by the pace of the plot. I invited several fellow adults to the movie that knew nothing of Harry Potter - and I noticed, time after time, that all of them were checking their watches regularly. I even found myself recalling the book and asking myself, "Does anything exciting happen next?". The answer is sadly no. Although the book was a joyful and fast read, the movie falls flat in delivering any of the suspense. And, more importantly, it did not deliver on what made me enjoy the books so much - the feeling you get when you read (or watch) something that reminds you of the magic in your own childhood. Not that there is any real magic in anyone's childhood, but friendships and adventures, that is the real magic (STAND BY ME / King's short story THE BODY).
As to the critics/parents demanding Rawling's head because of the Witches and Sorcerers in the book and movie - Hey folks, time to posse up some responsibility for your children. An educated child, whose parents talk to and have discussions with them, would never believe that anything in this movie is more than a movie. Or that a fiction book is anything more than a book. Reading Potter or any book is 1000 times better than 20 minutes of MTV, Pokemon, Power Rangers or whatever other mass media outlet that parents allow to baby sit their children. One reviewer cited CS Lewis's CHRONICLES OF NARNIA as a more wholesome form of reading. And I would agree that the Narnia stories are superior, but more wholesome? It is true that they usually parallel a biblical story or theme, but the relationship is usually so subtle that a child will not pick up on it. And yes, there are witches and other magical beings in the stories (even Santa Clause). Just because Lewis is a writer who writes on Christian themes, it does not make his stories less of a fantasy. Read THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS by Lewis if you want your morals to be properly chastised.
If you are really looking for a good time to spend on some magic themes, try watching BELL, BOOK AND CANDLE, THE WIZARD OF OZ, THE 10TH KINGDOM (mini series).
4/10 - Too long, too boring, no magic.
Ocean's Eleven (2001)
Entertaining, but not a classic.
Although George Clooney always seems to play some deviation of the same character, his movies tend to surprise me.
Ocean's 11 is nothing new. Not even close. Not only a remake, but the same rehash of plots from SNEAKERS to ENTRAPMENT to even SUGAR & SPICE. In other words, if you are looking for fresh air from a movie, this is not your ticket.
If you are looking for some nice, sleek entertainment boxed in the now typical two hour formula, then Ocean's 11 might be for you. Clooney is, well, the same Clooney as he always is, but does a nice job with it. He and Brad Pitt do a decent job of playing "The Buddies Setting Up The Heist" routine and the other cast members range from good to adequate. It's just a story, that's all it is. It is not a classic, but it is something that you can sit a watch and not feel like you wasted your time at the end - As long as you do not go in looking for trend setter.
If you are really hankering for an ensemble cast crime drama, try any of THE GODFATHER('s), BEAT THE DEVIL, TOUCH OF EVIL, THE USUAL SUSPECTS.
7/10 - Just entertainment.
Pearl Harbor (2001)
Sappy, yes, but worth a look.
For those of you scared of PEARL HARBOR because of the possible TITANIC and ARMAGEDDON syndrome - well, you have every right to be.
The CGI effects in the movie are stunning and the Japanese are portrayed pretty fairly as a country that felt like they had no choice.
For the most part, it does no harm to watch the movie. Seeing Ben Affleck in another movie like this, rehashing the same character from Armageddon, gets a bit tedious. Josh Harnett, as Affleck's bosom buddy, brings no real presence to the screen but dead pans his role well as a contrast. Kate Beckinsale, however, as the love interest, presents a relatively interesting character but has most of her screen time during the full half of the movie that is a tedious bore.
The real star of the movie is the FX and the flying/dog fight/bombing scenes. I do not usually like straight up action in a movie that claims to be more, but that is the best quality of this film and saves if from a 2 or 3 rating to that of a 5 or so.
If you have three hours to spare (I suggest renting the DVD Widescreen), then it will not hurt to sit down and take a look at this movie. The first 90 minutes will frustrate and bore you, but the last half is at least worth watching.
If you find yourself yearning for a long war movie that is time well spent, I would suggest DAS BOOT or SAVING PRIVATE RYAN.
**This movie is reviewed as a film and NOT as to the importance of the events portrayed.
6/10 - Watchable
Zombie vs. Ninja (1989)
Horrible . . .
A friend of mine and I went on a mission to find the worse movie of all time. After we watched this movie, we did not even bother to put in the other movies we rented.
A plot summary, character break down, or comments on the directing and acting would be useless. Only see this movie if to want to see something that is truly bad.
Also, do not make a mistake by thinking that this movie is bad in the way of the classic bad movies like, "Plan 9 From Outer Space". . . Zombie vs Ninja is just plain cut you eyes out, tear off your ears, smash your VCR, horrible. I am glad that this movie is not available to corrupt the DVD market.
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
Very interesting, straight forward movie with some scares.
Yes, the movie was over-hyped, however, it delivers an original thriller that does kinda get to you after a while.
The best concept film in a while; The movie takes a basic horror concept that has been around for centuries (a witch or witch like being) and combines it with simple, straight forward plot lines and dialog to make a very interesting film.
Probably the only thing really scary about the film is that it does not give you anything NOT to believe. There are no special effects or over-made monsters as the antithesis in the film. The location could be Anywhere, USA and the cast made you believe what was happening. All and all, you could almost believe that you were watching something that actually happened.
Unfortunately, ALMOST is the key word. The problem with the movie as a "horror" film is that you cannot suspend belief enough to really get scared. That is true in a sense of all horror films, but others have something PHYSICAL (like Michael Myers) that haunts you, even if you know it is not real. Blair Witch Project delivers as a thriller that makes you wonder what will happen as the movie progresses, but leaves you ultimately unfulfilled. It HAD to end the way it did, you just wish it didnt.
Overall, the film is worth seeing for the concept and as a good thriller... you may even get terrified if you can suspend your belief more than I. (7/10)
The Haunting (1999)
This is a movie that should not have been released...
The Haunting was, in as few of words as possible, really - very - unbelievably - with out question, the worse movie (that had hype) that I have seen this summer.
How, you may ask? Well, for starters, the plot was non-existent. There was some plot about the main character being the great, great, great, great, great grand daughter to some malicious evil man who tortured and murdered children. Apparently this is the same man who, though dead and a ghost, picked up a phone and suggested that the lead maiden check into a psychological experiment that would lead to Hill House. Nothing at all in this movie made any sense. I love a good scare and I am unquestionably a die-hard horror fan, but I would rather sit at home and watch MST3K than sit through this mostly boring film.
The lead up to the "scary" stuff was much more tense than the actual "horror" scenes in the movie. Though the FX were quite brilliant (DreamWorks, SKG rocks), they did not embellish on anything that was the least bit scary. Liam Neisson was under-used and mis cast and the supporting cast was adequate at best.
Though the premise of most horror films are usually quite flimsy, this movie makes Jason Vorheeves and Freddy Kruger seem as though they were born from Academy Award quality scripts.
Sorry there is not much of a plot summary here, but, alas, there was none. Two words of advice... SKIP IT!
The Haunting (1999)
This is a movie that should not have been released...
The Haunting was, in as few of words as possible, really - very - unbelievably - with out question, the worse movie (that had hype) that I have seen this summer.
How, you may ask? Well, for starters, the plot was non-existent. There was some plot about the main character being the great, great, great, great, great grand daughter to some malicious evil man who tortured and murdered children. Apparently this is the same man who, though dead and a ghost, picked up a phone and suggested that the lead maiden check into a psychological experiment that would lead to Hill House. Nothing at all in this movie made any sense. I love a good scare and I am unquestionably a die-hard horror fan, but I would rather sit at home and watch MST3K than sit through this mostly boring film.
The lead up to the "scary" stuff was much more tense than the actual "horror" scenes in the movie. Though the FX were quite brilliant (DreamWorks, SKG rocks), they did not embellish on anything that was the least bit scary. Liam Neisson was under-used and mis cast and the supporting cast was adequate at best.
Though the premise of most horror films are usually quite flimsy, this movie makes Jason Vorheeves and Freddy Kruger seem as though they were born from Academy Award quality scripts.
Sorry there is not much of a plot summary here, but, alas, there was none. Two words of advice... SKIP IT!