Change Your Image
tom_jones2
Reviews
Red Dragon (2002)
A tragic love story
Nevermind the comparisons; you've read enough of those. And nevermind the story; you already know what it's about. Personally, I'm just glad that the director of "Rush Hour" DIDN'T screw up a good story. The thing that I liked the most in this film was the treatment of the love story and how, if the right woman had discovered Dolarhyde a little earlier, she might have saved him. Maybe. It's nice to see the psychology of a character like Dolarhyde intact enough to make readers of the book talk about how well it was done and how he's treated as something more than an incomprehensible monster. Kudos to Fiennes and Watson for treating the love story proper--tragic. All the same, though...even though Dolarhyde WAS a "man with a freak on his back," and you do feel sorry for him...but you also realize he has to go!
Echo Park (1985)
"What do you REALLY do?"
That's what Susan Dey asks Tom Hulce, a pizza delivery man with ambitions of being a musician. He's good at it, but music won't pay the rent. So her question is really philosophical: he delivers pizzas, but his heart is in his music. So..."What do you REALLY do?" By itself, this film is barely a "C" movie. The only reason I choose to critique it is that it addresses the plight of so many wannabe actors, writers, musicians, artists, whomever, in LA. For all of what we hear on "Entertainment Tonight" or other shows focussing on stars, most of us "in" the entertainment business are doing something else for a living while dreaming of that lucky break. When Tom Hulce asks Susan Dey if she is an actress, she answers, "I TRY to act. I WANT to. I go to classes, but does that make me an actress? If it doesn't, then no, I'm not." The Tom Hulce character delivers pizza for a living while he dotes on the Susan Dey character, who throws herself at a dim bodybuilder who dreams of being the next Schwarzenegger. And in the meantime, they are all living in Echo Park, a seedy suburb in LA just outside of Hollywood. The whole film has an unfinished look to it, as though they had a limited budget and ran out of money just before they could wrap things up. And it has that cheap, pop-80's synthesizer music in the background, very common for that time frame. For entertainment, you can do a whole lot better than this. But if you plan to join us here in LA, this movie should be required viewing. Chances are that the lives these characters lead will be the life YOU lead if you decide to move to LA. There'll be an apartment for you to rent in Echo Park. 3 out of 10.
20 Dates (1998)
Once is too much.
Okay. Being a frustrated LA bachelor looking for the perfect woman in LA myself, I have to admit the film got my interest. And then I saw it. Then I thought about the movie and what the plot most likely was: an excuse for the writer-director-whatever to get in front of the camera, and say, "IT'S ALL ABOUT ME!!!" I don't have a problem with that, so long as the guy is interesting. But a nebbish looking for love in LA? THAT'S unique and interesting? Getin line, buster! What got me irritated, though, was that some of the dates he filmed didn't know he was filming them. That's just duplicitous and self-serving on the part of the man--not that that's anything unusual, but that rarely makes the guy sympathetic. Besides, when he wants to get intimate with his dates, he turns the camera off. How hypocritical is that? Overall, very disappointing film, and a very disappointing guy. I sometimes wonder if the date he wound up with ever stayed with him. But frankly, I doubt it.
The Omen (1976)
Well-made trash.
Let's face it: this is trash. A very badly-written script gets made and expects us to believe in the existence of the Devil made flesh, and of supernatural acts making the Devil's wishes real. It also expects us to believe in these over-the-top hysterics of people who don't sound the least bit human. Really, it's trash. Now that that's out of the way, it's trash that's well-made. Some of it has to do with Richard Donner, who knows how to set things up, and a lot of it, I think, has to do with Lee Remick. She manages to make herself grounded in reality as an innocent who doesn't know what's going on around her--that's what makes her horror scenes so frightening, because we imagine ourselves behaving the same way. And where Gregory Peck seems so ridiculous on his own, his scenes with her make us feel sympathy for him, because he shows genuine love for his wife(considering how good Remick looks, who can blame him?). I wouldn't give the film as high a rating as IMDB has, but I give the movie its due for making people scared out of foreboding and a sense of powerlessness to stop what's happening. All the same, this is a REALLY trashy movie!
Private Practices: The Story of a Sex Surrogate (1985)
The Practice of Love
Okay, here goes...
The first thing I should say is that this film is NOT porno, it is NOT exploitative, and it is NOT Jerry Springer; don't let the cover fool you.
All the same, how you react to this film depends very highly on your attitudes regarding the use of a sex partner in psychotherapy. If you can suspend your judgement(eg: reasoning such as, "she's being paid to have sex with these people, therefore she's a _____ and this is all California bull____ psychobabble."), you may be in for a nice thought-provoking documentary.
At the time this film was made, Maureen Sullivan was a professional sex partner. Meaning that she was referred to, and paid by, psychotherapists to have sexual interactions with different men who have different sexual dysfunctions. In the course of this film, we see her in therapy sessions with "Kipper," a 25-year-old man who is a virgin, and is terrified of even looking at a woman, nevermind touching one. The opening session, where she just takes his hand and looks him in the eye, is truly moving to watch as he works through his fear of physical love.
At the same time, Maureen is also going through sex therapy with a man named "John," a 45-year-old divorced father who is going through self-esteem problems(understandably).
What makes this film work is that these are not your usual reality-show nitwits with a limited vocabulary. Maureen, Kipper, John, and the peripheral people in the movie are all thoughtful, sensitive, and articulate. Plus, besides dealing with Kipper's and John's problems with sexual intimacy, we also deal with several emotional issues related to this. What does Maureen's neighbors and family think of the work she does? What happens if one of Maureen's patients falls in love with her? (John does) How does she keep her distance from him without destroying his self-esteem? And is there a reason why the only sexual and emotional relationships Maureen has with men are when they are her patients, where after a limited amount of time, the relationship is over? Does she have a problem with committing to one man?
All of these are questions that get raised from watching this film, and none of these are taken lightly.
On a side note, being a 35-year-old virgin male, it would be good for me to know if this practice is still being taken in the field of psychiatry. I identified very strongly with what Kipper was going through with her.
Not your usual diversion on a Friday night, but a very strong educational film regarding the practice of love. 9 out of 10.
One more note: this film is out of print, so you have to really look hard to find it.
Black Sunday (1977)
Black September
As a film by itself, it's a standard, by-the-numbers shootemup. At the time it was made, anyway. Well-crafted and well-acted, mind you, but still a movie that's for sitting down and enjoying your popcorn to. And it was made in 1977. And written by Thomas Harris, years before he had thought of Hannibal Lecter. Looking at this after the attacks, though, it's eerie and spooky, especially considering that many of the problems in the Middle East have not changed. And that many of the approaches of the "Black September" movement(how prophetic was THAT?) have been identical, or at the very least similar, to those of al-Qaida. Not a film I'd recommend for light escapism. But for a look at a film ahead of its time, I definitely recommend it...so long as you can stand revisiting the memory of the attacks on Black September, and on the psychology of people who would die and kill for their cause.
Clockwise (1986)
"This...is a historic moment."
Having known my share of stuffed shirts, I was howling at the torture of John Cleese in this film. You know who all those stuffed shirts are, too: those who insist on a spotless, shiny, tidy room; who balance out their finances every day, it seems; who have carved a nice manageable life for themselves. What makes the comedy work, though, is that in spite of all the setbacks Cleese suffers, the movie doesn't take any sadistic delight in them. When the car, and Cleese, gets stuck in the mud, we all cringe at his predicament, and laugh along with him, since we'd probably be going through the same thing ourselves, but for the grace of God. No toilet humor, no toilet language. Just a madcap comedy of errors fit for all. Right!
Miss Congeniality (2000)
Don't Take It Seriously!
Folks, this is not one of those "angry chick" flicks where the woman looks like a man, behaves like a man, treats everyone around her like dirt(some chicks might call that "self-assured," but I don't), and still expects to be thought of as a woman. This is also not one of those pictures that completely supports the whole beauty-pageant system. All this really is is a Sandra Bullock vehicle that's a reasonably entertaining film--providing you're not seeing this with some bitter butch feminist with a man-hating agenda! Is it a serious film? Heavens, no. Is it funny? Yes. Does Sandra Bullock look good? In the beginning she doesn't even look like a woman but after her makeover, hell yes! The fellas can enjoy the babes, and the chicks can enjoy watching Bullock open up a can of whoop-ass on the fellas. Poor Benjamin Bratt. It's got a little something to please, and offend, everybody. But don't take any of this so seriously. Just watch the darn movie and have fun.
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
Vapid, Tepid, Heartless and Lame
The Emperor has no clothes on! This is all I have to say for all those who claim this piece of noisy trash is art. If your background involves musical theatre, which consists of barely anything but flash and facial mugging WITH NO HEART OR SUBSTANCE, this is the film for you. The film did exhibit some astounding visual tricks and stunts, to be sure. But just about any Hollywood big-budget production can boast as much. Just answer me this: Did any of the stunts, tricks, set pieces, or musical numbers, make you feel anything for, or care for, ANY of the characters? My answer is: NO, it did NOT! This film is the equivalent of that stunning beauty you see at the bar. You walk up to her, start a conversation, and all that comes out of her mouth is ignorance and stupidity and conversation about her plastic surgery improvements. Now, that does not bother a lot of people. Me, it takes a whole lot more than a flashy look and HUZZAH!! facial expressions to impress me. What's left? A vapid "love story" with tepid characters, a heartless plot and a LAME movie. I'll say it again: The Emperor has no clothes on!
Bridget Jones's Diary (2001)
Lame, lame, LAME!!!
What people see in this utter waste of time, I will never know, or want to know. The only worthwhile thing in this film is Bridget's opera-diva number, where she sings alone to a Celine Dion(?) number. But since that happens during the opening credits, it sets a bad precedent for the rest of the film. Let's see...Bridget Jones is a vulgar alcoholic with an inferiority complex with a fixation on the wrong kind of man(seriously, do we have to buy this fiction that Hugh Grant is what women want?), turning herself into badly-used goods before our very eyes and she STILL wants our sympathy? To all women seeing her as a role model, I say GROW THE HELL UP!!! What kind of world are we living in that a man is expected to love a living train wreck like Bridget instead of a REAL woman who has it together and is able to express love for the right kind of man...for once? A waste of time, and a waste of money. I am only glad I didn't read the book, and that after two hours, this rape of my sensibilities was over, and that I never have to be subjected to it again. A 2 out of 10.
Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Ugh.
Glad I saw this film. Never want to see it again in my life. I'm not sure why Hubert Selby Jr. has taken it upon himself to present us these basically likable people and subject them to such nerve-ripping torture and misery. Sadism, perhaps? This is not to say that there aren't beautiful elements in the film. I could go for miles on the "Summer" section. Ellen Burstyn's speech on growing old and being alone is extraordinarily sad, and the friendship between Jared Leto and Marlon Wayans is a true joy. Wayans' energy is simply wonderful. And Jennifer Connelly? Oh, my. It truly is a shame that there aren't more women out there with her looks and her energy, and confidence and sexuality. It's even more shameful that the ones who are are all spoken for. But I digress. I can understand the point this film makes: addiction is bad. (Boy, never heard THAT before!!) But it also points out many of the legal addictions that many commentators seem to have forgotten: chocolate, coffee, television, drink, food...longed-for letters in the mailbox, the desire for money, music, sex, love, hope... It would be nice to have some kind of light of hope to hang on to. But it seems as thought Aronofsky just wants to subject his viewers to nausea, revulsion(do we really need to see a needle jamming into a festering purple sore? or a sexual degradation done THAT explicitly?!?), and a depression so intense, you just want to jump out the nearest window. Ugh. Nice vision of "Summer," Darren. And incredible artistry and editing. Now, PLEASE, for the rest of us, give your sadism a rest and give us images of real beauty. I'll settle for ninety minutes of staring at Jennifer Connelly in that red dress at the edge of the pier, or just have her staring at me. But keep me away from movies like this one!
Rules of Engagement (2000)
Tell It To The Marines!
I have a lot of mixed feelings about this film. I agree with the side that hates it, and I agree, with reservations, with the right-wingers who love it. Let's start with what I don't like. Sure, Jackson and Jones are both strong, honest, and intense in their roles. But honestly, haven't we seen them in the same roles a few times too often already? The film is also very predictable and by the numbers. There's really nothing in this story line that hasn't already been done a hundred times before in different movies of the week, paperback novels, stage plays, TV episodes... There are a couple of good performances in this film, though. Ben Kingsley is compelling as always. How he manages to save his work even in terrible films(remember "Species?") is a reminder to actors that a bad film doesn't mean you have to do bad work. Guy Pierce is also strong as the prosecution lawyer making his case against Jackson. Even though you know he's going to lose(come on, is that really a spoiler? Did you really think Samuel L Jackson was going to go to jail by the end of the movie?), Pierce fights like hell to prove his point. And it is a strong point. The trouble is, both those roles are underused. And as the story between Jackson and Jones goes on, I really wanted to know more about Kingsley and Pierce, and what they were thinking. I never found out, though. What tipped my thumb up on this film, then? The combat sequences and Captain Dale Dye, USMC. Dye is the leader of a movie-combat group called Warriors, Inc. A Vietnam veteran himself, he choreographed the combat scenes in "Platoon," "Forrest Gump" and "Saving Private Ryan," among others. And his work in the massacre sequence made the whole movie work for me. It's realistic and very frightening to watch, especially considering the times we live in, and that American troops in Afghanistan will be in situations just like this. Or worse, horrible as that thought may be. Is it propaganda? Yes. But that's Hollywood. Is it mediocre? Yes. But again, that's Hollywood, mostly. Is it irrelevant? No. Watch the combat scene, take your problems with it, and tell it to the Marines.
The Dark Crystal (1982)
Innocence Lost
When I first saw "The Dark Crystal," I was 14 years old and became obsessed over that world, just as I was obsessed over Middle-Earth in "Lord Of The Rings" or Shannara or the fantasy world of the Thomas Covenant series.
Having just seen it for the first time in over fifteen years, although I know the film by heart, I couldn't help feeling sad over it.
Jim Henson and Frank Oz definitely created a vision out of love--the details in this world created by hand-crafted sets and puppetry have more soul than any computer-generated dinosaurs or spaceships of today. But at the same time, they show an ideal world far better than anything we could ever realistically live in.
Maybe that's why this film never sold very well to its audience; too idealistic for its own time, even for our own time. Would it get made today? Doubtful. "Saturday Night Fever" wouldn't get made today.
As it is, though, "The Dark Crystal" is a visual masterpiece of puppetry. See it for Jim Henson's vision, if you never have seen true artwork, done for its own sake without really thinking about how much money it would make. If you've seen it before, though, I can only describe it as a kind of innocence lost.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)
Just because you're paranoid does not mean they're not after you...
One of the few scary films around that truly is scary. And with a minimum of blood and gore, no less. It takes its time by getting to know the characters and the fact that something is wrong, although you can't quite figure out what... All the leads in the film are good, and Philip Kaufman's directing make this film one of the masterpieces of science fiction horror. His use of odd camera lenses and warped mirrors to give the movie that fish-eyed sense of distortion; weird camera angles to make people think they're in one place, then turn the camera around to make you realize you're someplace else. The alien screams are what really raise the hairs on your neck, simply by how they're not like anything you've ever heard in your life. But at a basic level, the movie says something very frightening about conformity, which is the most terrifying thing of all. The aliens' persuasions: you won't feel a thing, you'll feel better afterwards, you'll never be afraid or hateful again; sound suspiciously like real people today persuading others to cut their hair, dress and behave properly, be polite... All in all, a great story about the horrible cost of what it takes to "blend in with the others."