Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Flight (I) (2012)
3/10
A good film corrupted by Hollywood greed,,,
8 November 2012
Warning: Spoilers
It is easy to appreciate the high praise for one of Denzel's finest performances, the wonderful cast, and the quality of the narrative and storyline over the course of most of the film. This script had great potential to produce an often compelling story, with fine characters and direction. (I'm ignoring the fact that in everyday reality, a pilot like Denzel's character would be impossible, since professional pilots are subjected to regular drug and alcohol tests.) But, alas, virtually all the reviews and reviewers are blind to the film's fatal flaw.

What so terribly wrong here?? In nearly all action films and psychological dramas, the writers and director are offered several different--often competing--conclusions, the final "hook." I watched a film that deserved an 6/7 for its entire length, until the final 15 minutes, the scene where Denzel's character breaks down in a sudden fit of moral consternation in the official inquiry. At this point, the film suddenly is transformed from a serious drama into a sloppy, moralizing MELODRAMA. What a great loss. But Hollywood will out, destroying an intrinsically dark tale by providing a redemptive "happy ending" that is utterly incredible. Of course, 90% the audiences will love this, but it doesn't change the facts.

Think: When Denzel's character's interrogator asks the big question in the hearing, the real alcoholic he's been in every scene becomes a utterly different person. He can easily avoid blaming the innocent stewardess, AND save himself, with one answer: "I don't know." And then repeating it, over and over. Exactly what a binge drinker would have done--except for Hollywood and HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars at stake at the box office!! Concluding the film with the broken pilot preaching the gospel of AA while gratefully serving his prison term is like stepping into an entirely different fantasy, one without credible linkage. Speaking as a professional writer, no one who has read great novels and fiction critically can come to any other conclusion. But this qualifier regarding familiarity with supreme fictions will exempt the vast majority of readers who usually appear on this site.
91 out of 149 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Another masterpiece by Ed Wood
24 June 2012
It's mildly tempting to give this absurdest, incoherent, pretender-to-mythic-significance of a film the brutal review it fully deserves. The mythic material that serves as a major part of the foundation for this movie is treated with ignorance and contempt. This is one of the worst movies ever. But my experience on this site is that the cotton-candy-brained typical audience member viewing films these days would barely or never understand any references providing meaningful evaluation. Very sadly, that's about 95% of average viewers.

Spoiler-- It's a statistical fact that less than 3% of American are unique subscribers to Newsweek, Time, The Atlantic, The New Yorker, or similar publications, based on Pew data seven years ago. We have become a nation of anti-intellectuals, with no capacities for critical thinking at all; actually, according to Richard Hofstadter's great book, we always have been. Even today's college graduates frequently know very little about the arts and sciences; we are a culture in rapid decline.

This film's "success" is based on the premise that Hollywood can regularly count on national stupidity, represented recently by Tea Partiers--individuals consistently clueless regarding 17th-century America and its Boston tea.

Apologies to the masterful Tim Burton for the "summary." "Ed Wood" will always be a classic worth seeing over and over.
28 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Prometheus (I) (2012)
1/10
Technical effects--8, Story and characters--0
16 June 2012
As a former Ridley Scott fan and a film reviewer with nearly thirty years of experience, this pathetic attempt to pander to the dumb-and-dumber contemporary film audience was simply appalling. As I watched, I was either stunned by the fateful attempts to create faux drama or driven to breakout laughter when chunks of dozens of old science-fiction classic films or scenes were cynically and mockishly linked together with bubble gum--for a bubble-gum viewer.

Amazingly, in this production we get random pieces of everything Ridley Scott ever directed or wished he'd directed (including the line, "He cut me off!" from "Top Gun"), as well as direct knock-offs from "Star Wars" and "Star Trek." (God, please-- "I'm your father, Luke"!!) These woeful derivatives actually encompass "Contact," "Little Big Man" and even "The X Files" (with that ol' black magic oil).

Even the "characters" are nearly all knock-offs. Several reviews have praised Fassbender; but he's merely trying to live up to the original cyborg from 1979, played by the great Ian Holm. All of these rather pristine primary elements have been tossed into the film marketer's blender and whipped into a witless, terrible glue. This is Hollywood techno-garbage entirely without shame, with no concern for the integrity of coherent plot or story or mythic narrative or character or anything necessary and decent. Yet in the theatre where I saw the film, it was fairly clear that virtually no one had any clear notion regarding what was actually occurring on screen.

I used to teach a course at Virginia Tech entitled "Religion and Science Fiction." At the time, there was nothing in existence like this in film that so tortured everything that great SF represents, even the older B films. When you get to select among "2001" or "Alien" or many other fine or interesting features for screening...and then barely manage to sit through this nonsense (which has only a marginal relationship with the mythic Greek Prometheus--except in the Romantic tradition), you know you're in a different cosmos.

Along with the recent "The Cabin in the Woods," this is one of the WORST 10 or 20 films I've ever seen. Every actor in this work should be ashamed of himself or herself, especially Theron and Pearce. In today's world of film making, actual integrity and the pursuit of high-quality story (and its production) are becoming increasingly marginal. Thanks to the advancing failure of our higher educational system, the average viewer can now be anesthetized with nothing more than technical fireworks.

Where is the next "Schindler's List" or "Momento" or "Good Will Hunting" or "The Departed" or "The Matrix"? There are so many great SF writers whose fiction remains unexplored, like Ursula K. Le Guin.
32 out of 60 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
An abomination of a film
5 March 2008
This film makes mashed potatoes of 16th century history. A must-read as a preface to this era-- Wm Manchester, "A World Lit Only by Fire." A query to all participants in Hollywood: What's happening to the obligation to edify as well as entertain?? Answer: No felt imperatives at all!! Just slice everything down to the lowest common denominator in the audience--incredibly damn low in the theater where I saw the film (with predictable shrieks and ohs in all the wrong places). Natalie, how could you sacrifice the favorable substance of your career to this drivel. For Scarlet, it's par for her course, save "Pearl Earring." ---- ---- ---
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed