Reviews

15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Fond Memories
7 June 2023
Ah, I remember this show from my misspent youth. I had had six beers, most drunk in Grant Park, and I had visited my cousin (who has become an insufferable twit) at the high-rise in which he had recently moved. We watched at least some of this show, which I had commented on in my December 5, 1993 journal entry. I had only mentioned Meg Ryan and Julia Roberts in that entry. I left out the other three interviewees (Pfeiffer, Stone, and Jackson) for whatever reason. This was so long ago (it's June 6, 2023 as I lie here in the nude in my bed, typing this on my 2018 iPad (6th generation)) that I actually still liked Julia Roberts.

I believe that the interviews conducted by Mr. Sheehan did hold my interest at the time, in my inebriated state (ten beers in less than two hours; I had had four of my cousin's beers), and, since no one else had seen fit to leave a review, I felt compelled-nay, OBLIGATED-to let the world know that, yes, this show, which I can BARELY remember, WAS enjoyed by at least one person.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gymkata (1985)
3/10
3 Stars for Competence,10 for Fun: A Running Summary of Some of Gymkata (Notes Taken While Viewing), Which, Sadly, Comes to an Abrupt End Because of the 10,000 Character Limit
20 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
As the movie opens, Jonathan Cabot is doing his routine on the high bar as his father is running for his life playing "The Game". Jonathan wins and his father loses. Jonathan is shown mounting the parallel bars after his father is shown seemingly falling to his death. It's difficult to win a game in which you have to climb across a rope suspended above a chasm when a guy with a bow and arrow is waiting for you on the other side: Cabot Sr.: "Kahn explained the game. Now back off!" Zamir: "And you believed the fool."

Paley: "For the next two months, you're gonna toughen your mind and your body. Any questions?" "None." No? How could you not? Who is this guy? What does he want? At this point, Cabot doesn't know.

Cabot is shown a picture of a man and asked if he recognizes him. "Isn't that Mel Brooks?" He actually says, "The Kahn of Parmistan."

"What do you know about his country?" "It's a tiny mountain nation in the middle of the Hindu Kush range." Yeah, that's how people talk.

Parmistan's location is the reason for the mission.

Paley: "A Star Wars satellite station inside Parmistan could monitor all the other satellite stations around the world. It would be the ultimate early warning system in case of nuclear attack."

If you enter Parmistan, you must play "The Game". If you win, you are allowed your life, and one request.

The princess is an expert at the game.

The training pushes Cabot to his limits, but it's necessary to win "The Game".

Cabot earns the princess's respect as he trains.

Paley: No outsider has won "The Game" in over 900 years.

Other countries are training their best athletes to win "The Game".

Cabot is able to walk stairs on his hands. This does not come into play while playing "The Game".

The princess's mother was Indonesian. Her father is the king of Parmistan. She is unwilling to talk, but is willing to have sex with Cabot.

Karabal is a border town 100 miles from Istanbul on the Caspian Sea. He will meet Colonel Mackle (nickname "The Stork") there, who will provide Cabot with weapons and equipment necessary for "The Game".

In captions, "KARABAL, ON THE CASPIAN SEA", which is funny since this was the exact wording used by Paley AND Cabot earlier.

Cabot and the princess have fallen in love even though she still hasn't spoken. Her first line: "Fine piece of work," after seeing a spring-loaded blade do its thing. Cabot doesn't even notice that it's the first time that she's spoken.

No firearms are allowed in Parmistan. Get caught with a gun and "he'll chop your head off", according to Colonel Mackle.

Water is thrown in Cabot's face: "American, go home."

"Well, there's just a little anti-American sentiment running around, but I think..." An arrow to the ribs does not allow the agent to finish his sentence.

Many men attack Cabot, who easily beats them up. One of Paley's agents has not fared as well. He has a spear sticking out of his chest; he's dead. He's sitting upright. There is blood from another wound, too.

Cabot meets Mackle in a secret place.

Cabot finds a high bar located in an alley and starts swinging. Conveniently, four thugs come within range of his swinging and are kicked unconscious. His technique is perfect as he does so with no form breaks (that's gymnastics talk). He also mistakenly kicks a bicyclist, but that's ok. Consider it collateral damage.

The princess is being held hostage by Tamerlane, who is something of an unknown quantity.. "Once the Khan knows that we have you, he will gladly relinquish his throne (pronounced "trone") in exchange for your life." Cabot beats up three of Tamerlane's men and eventually shoots Tamerlane. Two other of Tamerlane's thugs chase Cabot and the Princess, shooting at them. A lot of running down narrow alleys being chased.

Colonel Mackle is listening to something with headphones. Cabot and Princess come back to the secret place. "What the hell is this, Stork? Nothing's been done. Nothing is packed." Mackle points his gun at Cabot. "This is a real shame, Cabot." Paley blows him away, which is hilarious. "I've always said that Special Intelligence should have handled this whole operation". Apparently he had somehow been hiding in the secret place, unbeknownst to Mackle. He then blows away two other guys. "Double blackmail", whatever that means.

"Well, that cleans up things here. You'll leave in the morning."

Cabot and the princess then take mules until they reach rapids, which they ride to their destination. Masked men on horseback pursue them.

When Cabot sees the eight men, he asks the princess, "Are those your people?" She replies, "Yes. But things have changed." The men in black surround him. Cabot is getting the best of some of these gentlemen, but someone knocks him out. He wakes up in bed having his face caressed by a woman in need of some dental work who is missing a tongue. Commander Zamir, Advisor to the Khan, informs him of the tonguelessness. He has been sent by Khan to welcome Cabot to his country. Princess Rubali is with her father. Zamir leaves and the tongueless woman with dark circles around her eyes who is missing teeth returns to caress Cabot.

The elite and brave athletes who are willing to risk everything for their countries are gathered around Khan as he explains, "The first challenge is a three-mile run across the swamp to the second obstacle, a 200 foot rope climb. From there it is but a half-mile to the gorge. The fourth part is to enter the river that will lead you dead or alive to the high forest. If successful, you will enter the Village of the Damned. Surviving this, there is the final five mile run through the swamp again. There will be judges to show the way. THERE CAN BE NO MISTAKES. ANYONE TRYING TO AVOID AN OBSTACLE WILL BE INSTANTLY KILLED." The king then smiles broadly and leaves to "play king to my people".

Three men who have been convicted of "grave crimes" are given a chance at life by playing "The Game". Cabot asks if Thorg is going to be here. "Superman? I don't know, I haven't seen him." "Let's hope he makes it." The three men are released and pursued by the townsfolk, ninjas, AND men on horseback. They run into the swamp. The men are killed quickly. The final one is shot with an arrow while trying to cross the rope over the gorge. We then see what is obviously a dummy falling and landing on a rock. There is a loud thud. The man screams as he falls.

Now it's on to the banquet. The crowd applauds the Khan/king, who is obviously a popular ruler. He tells Cabot that his father was "not victorious" at the game. This doesn't seem to bother Cabot much. What bothers him more is that the princess will be marrying Kamir tomorrow. The crowd goes wild in anticipation of such a joyous event. Enter the great Thorg to much fanfare. He looks like the love child of Will Ferrell and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Cabot: "Thorg." Thorg glances at him but doesn't respond. Thorg: "Forgive my tardiness, great Khan. I hope I haven't inconvenienced you." Khan: "It is our honor to have you with us. Please, sit down." Cabot stands and holds out his hand: "Thorg. Jonathan Cabot. I've admired you since Munich." Thorg ignores him. Cabot looks hurt. Princess looks sexily at Cabot. Kamir notices this and quietly fumes. He gets up and twirls the sharp thingies around, and then throws them in the direction of Cabot, narrowly missing him. He walks over to Cabot and says, "You must understand. She's mine". Cabot responds, "It's not over yet. So put your hardware (the sharp thingies) back in your pants."

Next scene: Tongueless woman enters room with love in her heart. Cabot grabs her at knifepoint: "You will take me to the Princess Rubali." She has a terrified look on her face. She tells the princess to meet Cabot in the garden.

Mel Brooks really hams it up. The crowd loves him.

"Children of Parmistan. R U ready for the Game?"

He announces the Game AND a royal wedding.

"Let the Game begin!"

And the men run. Thorg kicks Cabot.

Zamir and his (masked) men follow. Khan: "Zamir, stop! You are breaking the rules! You must pursue on my command!" Zamir and his men ignore this and continue.

The men run through the long grass, pursued by ninjas and Zamir's men on horseback. Thorg is built like a bodybuilder but can run like the wind. The men climb ropes. One macho man screams in a high-pitched voice after being struck by arrows in the lower back and buttocks, and falling to the ground, presumably to his death. Zamir sets fire to Cabot's rope. Cabot makes it to the top before the fire reaches him. He tells a judge (in ninja garb holding a flag): "They broke the rules. Kill them!" No response. "Damn it!"

Cut to three men running, one of whom is mighty Thorg. The ninja judges are present. Cut to a man in a blue track suit running. Then to two men, one of whom is Cabot, and the other, who has a wounded right thigh, which he is holding. Cabot yells, "Hurry!" at him as he runs past him. Four ninjas pursue. One throws a spear. Zamir and his men, all on horseback, follow. We see the wounded man lying in a prone position, dead, with a spear sticking out of his back. The men on horseback ride by. Four men travel across the rope over the gorge. Three make it. The man in the blue track suit is hit over the head with a sword by a ninja and falls with a very loud thud on a rock (similar to the other guy who fell on a rock with a very loud thud). Again, it is obviously a dummy. And his scream as he falls is funny.

Cabot begins crossing the rope. Zamir tugs the rope and eventually cuts it, but it's too late. Cabot has made it across, pulling himself up by the rope on the other side. A ninja swings at him with a sword; Cabot ducks, avoiding the sword, and kicks the ninja, who falls to his death, screaming.

Note: I summarized the whole movie but it exceeded the maximum character length so this concludes my running commentary on this VERY entertaining film.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
The Movie That Made Jacqueline Bisset a Star
24 August 2022
This is a surprisingly sweet, even wholesome movie about three young American men who are trying to get their rocks off north of the border in a Canadian bordello. It reminded me quite a bit of "The Summer of '42" in its tenderness and a little of "Losin' It" in its subject matter. It combined the best of both of those to create a thoroughly winning depiction of life as it was lived in 1969. The dialogue of the three friends is more realistic than what is heard in most movies, and the acting is spot on. If you are like me (and most of you are), you will feel an overwhelming desire to be friends with these regular guys. They each have their own insecurities (as we all do), which are manifested in very different ways. These insecurities make them even more endearing than they would otherwise be.

Of course, "The First Time" is best known as the film that made Jacqueline Bisset a star, in much the same way that "...And God Created Woman" had for Brigitte Bardot. Bisset had appeared in a number of earlier films, but this is the one that finally put her over the top, allowing the world to see that not only was she gorgeous and sexy (in that understated British way), but that she had the acting chops to carry a picture. She also displayed a warmth here that had not been as evident in those earlier flicks.

Bisset did not even appear in the first half of the movie, but from the moment the young men see her talking on the phone, the movie is hers. A scene in which she has just been told on the phone (a different phone and a different scene) by the married man with whom she has been having an affair that he can't continue to see her is heartbreaking in its poignancy. When she cried, I cried (and you will, too). Luckily, one of the young men, played wonderfully by Wes Stern, is there to make all her pain go away.

So...while this fine film is famous for making Jacqueline Bisset a star, it has much more going for it than that. If you have a chance to watch it, please do. You won't be disappointed. I guarantee it.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mala Noche (1986)
4/10
Uninvolving, Rather Repulsive Little Film
20 July 2022
Drab look at the lives of three losers. The main character, the ostensible hero, is probably the worst of the three. He falls in love with Loser #2 almost immediately. It's really lust, but I'm trying to pretty it up a bit. The lead actor actually does a pretty good job. He gives a natural, relaxed performance. The problem is that he's boring. Why anyone would care about his daily doings is beyond me. So who does? The Rotten Tomato Crowd, that's who! A 100% rating from them. Why? Because they identify with the characters. The Rotten Tomato Crowd is made up of ambitious types who fancy themselves to NOT be that; therefore, they see themselves in the three main characters of this sordid display. They also got bullied a lot when they were younger, which makes them identify with "victims".

Do yourself a favor; skip this Road to Nowhere exercise. Instead, watch a Van Sant movie that IS worth seeing: "Drugstore Cowboy". It, too, is about losers, but it has a style and a story that is much more likely to appeal to you-unless you are very, very odd.

Added over two months after the initial review: Most people, were they to know the particulars of my life, and without actually talking to me and getting a sense of what I'm all about, would think of me as a loser. Therefore, perhaps I shouldn't be so ready to use that pejorative term. The characters are what they are. The main character WAS annoying to me because I couldn't understand any of his motivations (other than lust, I guess), and the two other prominent characters didn't say or do anything that interested me. For a low budget movie, though, it was pretty well done, and did make an attempt to realistically portray/depict what I think of as the mundane.

I added this postscript because I was feeling down about myself. Whether you care or not is up to you, although you SHOULD care because I am your brother and you are my keeper. As my keeper, though, will you PLEASE let me out from time to time?

One last note: As a punishment for myself (and possibly you), I have left my original two-paragraph review intact. I HAVE increased my rating from 2 to 4, however, because of the verisimilitude thing AND the value of all human lives, no matter how shallow and drab. I once filmed someone's face for two hours, telling the owner of that face to remain as expressionless as possible. He had been told that he would be paid $200 later, which turned out to be untrue. I showed this film to some pretentious asses, who watched the whole thing, and thought it was brilliant; they had intense discussions about the slightest change of expression, and attempted to interpret what those changes "signified". I also showed it to some people who were not artsy-fartsy, and they, rightly, said that it was boring, and refused to continue watching it after about seven or eight minutes, especially after they learned that the next 110 minutes would be more of the same.

Have any of you watched some of Andy Warhol's films, the ones in which almost nothing happens? If you enjoyed those, you probably will enjoy the pile of garbage that is "Mala Noche". "Mala Noche" es muy mala.

Addendum: My review has left me with a bad-you might say, mala-taste in my mouth because its tone is too negative. Perhaps I could have gotten my ideas across in a more positive, and, therefore, more effective way. I do know one thing: I have tossed and turned in my bed while thinking about this review, which leads me to believe that something about it does not sit well with me. And Mr. Van Sant, if you have read my review in the past-as I suspect that you have-and if you are reading this addendum, I'm sorry for the overall tone of my review, although this low-budget movie of yours really WAS mala. I have a feeling that you're sorry that you made it now. I liked "Drugstore Cowboy" very much, and enjoyed "Good Will Hunting". The less said about the others, the better, though they were all more enjoyable to me (not that they WERE enjoyable) than "Mala Noche" was. Keep up the (occasionally) good work.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Quirky, Clever, and Often Hilarious
4 July 2022
Some Notes Toward a Review:

Virtues of the Film

1. Plays it straight 2. Genuinely funny 3. Ken Nordine's earnest narration 4. Voight's good-natured performance-sweet (the rube) but also sour 5. Darden's funny dual performance, particularly his Yiddish accent 6. Chicago in glorious technicolor 7. Making the movie at all was bold 8. The two songs create a dream-like atmosphere-one sounds like Nico 9. A little bit of everything-comedy, drama, mood piece 10. Every performance is good 11. Where else can you see Nelson Algren in a movie? 12. Some of it seems like it was being made up on the fly 13. The freedom of creation shown by Kaufman 14. Quirky henchmen-Rat, Cat, Needles (an allusion to "The Man with the Golden Arm"?), and, of course, Screwnose, who is obviously based on Richard Nixon

Some reviewers take it WAY too seriously, missing the oddness that makes it unique.

Added over a year after the initial review: I just watched this movie again and didn't like it nearly as much as I had, proving that our mood while watching a movie has a lot to do with how we experience that movie. Upon a second viewing, I found the movie more tedious than I had remembered it, and what I had found hilarious-or, at least, amusing-the first time around, had tended to fall flat the second time. Its slipshod nature, which had been a virtue to me was now a vice. I do know that at least once or twice, this second time around, I had laughed so hard that tears had come to my eyes so it still had the power to amuse. I think so, anyway, unless it was something else that I had watched recently, and I'm confusing that with this movie.

Why am I adding these comments to my initial review? Because my integrity wouldn't allow me to do otherwise. One's assessment of everything should always be changing. If not, one is stagnating, which isn't too far removed from being dead.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Perfection
19 April 2022
Any words I would use to express my profound love for "Babette's Feast" would be inadequate. I can do no more than to urge you to see this beautiful, deeply moving film as soon as you can. You won't be sorry.

And if you already have seen it, you know what I mean-and, also, how mere language can not convey something that is beyond language. There is no substitute for experience.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Easy Life (1962)
10/10
One of the Great Star Turns in Movie History
26 March 2022
The success of this movie depends almost entirely on the performance of Vittorio Gassman. In a less charismatic, charming actor's hands, what we see take place would be of virtually no interest to anyone. Gassman inhabits the character of Bruno so thoroughly and winningly that all but the most insensate of viewers could not help but become captivated. Mad, bad, and dangerous (very dangerous, as it turns out) to know, Bruno is that rare man, the kind that every man wants to be, and that every woman wants to be with. Whether driving at breakneck speed, dancing sensually with a woman who almost loses control of herself, or simply talking to his new friend, his estranged wife, or his daughter, our eyes never leave him. The adventures that the two main characters experience are actually rather silly a lot of the time, at least in retrospect, but somehow they don't seem that way AS they are being experienced for one simple reason: they are being experienced by Bruno.

I enjoyed this wild ride from beginning to end, and near the end of the movie, when I saw-and, more importantly, felt-the pain that Gassman was able to convey, I was left with tears streaming down my face.

Added later:

After watching this movie again, I have decided to give it 3 5/16 out of a possible 4 stars. This rating is subject to change since each viewing is a different experience. My ratings, always out of a possible four stars, seldom if ever deviate by more than one star for a particular movie upon multiple viewings. For example, if I give a movie a rating of 2 1/2 stars, it will be highly unlikely I would ever give that movie less than 1 1/2 stars or more than 3 1/2 stars at ANY time.

I initially gave "Il Sorpasso" a rating of 10/10 when I first reviewed it here since I was so taken with Gassman's performance. Upon a second viewing, I became aware of some flaws I had missed the first time around. I COULD see the forest (the movie as a whole) for the trees (and all those trees HAD been Gassman for me). Still, I will stick with my rating of 10/10 because that was how I felt at the time of the review, and to change it would be to value my second experience of the movie more highly than that very special first experience.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hustlers (2019)
5/10
Foolish Film Wants It Both Ways
15 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
"Hustlers" is a shallow movie that doesn't understand Wall Street at all, but what can you expect when two of its producers are Will Ferrell and his buddy, Adam McKay? Decisions made at the very top, which were not illegal, but were reckless, were what led to the real estate crisis. Most Wall Street employees were just doing their jobs and had nothing to do with the fiasco.

Many of the men in this movie are supposedly awful because they like to look at scantily-clad women writhing around. What do we, the moviegoers, get to see a lot of? Scantily-clad women writhing (and wriggling) around. If it weren't for men who are willing to pay to see that, wouldn't these women be out of jobs? Yet they're portrayed as the bad guys, apparently because they objectify women who willingly take jobs in which they are little more than objects.

The film tries to justify ripping off the men who are responsible for the strippers' income. They had it coming, apparently, for both objectifying women, and for working on evil Wall Street. Of course, some of the guys had to be portrayed as lecherous creeps in an attempt to gain sympathy for the women's unethical scheme, and, if you read the reviews of the Rotten Tomato crowd, you will see that this attempt was largely successful. Many of these naive reviewers even portray the women as feminist heroes.

Somehow the ringleader, played by Jennifer Lopez, doesn't wind up doing any time for her crimes, probably because she's a woman. Sometimes that old double standard works out quite well when one's gender automatically positions one as a victim.

If you want to see Lopez's ample rear end on display, you may well enjoy this. I think she wanted to show the world that just because one carries a particularly wide load doesn't mean that that load can't be firm.

The film is competently directed (at least to me) on a visual level, with plenty of quick shots of sweaty, gleaming bare skin. The acting also isn't bad, which makes a movie that attempts to make heroes out of villains almost watchable. This accounts for my 2 3/8 out of 4 star rating (I use a 4 star rating system) rather than the 1 1/2 that it probably deserves.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
McDowall Shines in this Scathing Indictment of Soviet Totalitarianism and Oppression
17 April 2021
This tense, realistic, masterfully acted and written drama of what life is like in a country under Soviet domination (though the Soviet Union is never named), is well-worth seeing. Roddy McDowall, best-known for playing Cornelius in "Planet of the Apes", and for being a bon vivant who threw fabulous parties in decadent Hollyweird, shows what he can do when given a script that actually demands something of him. He was so naturally gifted, so instinctive of an actor, that he often appeared to be coasting in his performances. The stakes are too high in this brilliant expose to allow McDowall to do that. He has to dig down as deep as he can, trying to reach an emotional truth that is worthy of the material, and he succeeds beautifully. He is ably assisted by the other actors, who also rise to the occasion, particularly, Kristine Miller, Harry Lauter, and Glen Vernon.

What makes the film so effective is its focus on the characters, and its refusal to oversimplify what is a complex world with many moving parts. By immersing us in the lives of people about whom we care, we see the personal costs of living under a totalitarian regime and the courage required to resist it. It is not a preachy, didactic, cold exercise; it is a living and breathing work of art.

Some reviewers here have used the term, "Red Scare", to pigeonhole this film, a term that is usually used to imply that the fear or "scare" is baseless, a figment of the imagination. In truth, the devastation caused by Stalin and his successors was, sadly, anything but a fantasy, as the millions of lives that were destroyed makes obvious. There actually WAS something of which to be afraid, and "The Steel Fist" powerfully conveys what that something was.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Propagandistic Pig 🐷 Swill
10 March 2021
Where to begin with this mess? The ludicrous plot? The artificial dialogue? The self-satisfied smugness? The unsuccessful attempts at wit? The insipidity? The dullness? The odd casting choices? All of the above? None of the above?

Well, here goes: Members of the National SOCIALIST Party were many things but stupid they were not. The filmmakers would have you believe that they would be incapable of tying their own shoes or counting to ten. What subtle wit. The gang that couldn't shoot straight isn't even aware when a large group of strangers is in their midst. WWII should have only lasted a week or two, I guess.

Propaganda almost always looks bad after the cause for the propaganda has passed, and this is certainly the case here. A cinematic universe has been created in which no one behaves as any human being ever would. This wouldn't be so bad if anything happened that was interesting. At the theater I was at, I saw many people looking at their watches. Half of the sizable crowd had left before the final curtain. Unfortunately, I was not one of them.

I would like to add one rather controversial comment, if I may. I have an unblemished record of heterosexuality in my long, all-too-long life, but I feel compelled to let you, my dear readers, know that I found Robert Stack more attractive than Carole Lombard in this turkey. He seemed to practically glow with vitality, while she seemed pasty-faced and lifeless, something that, as it turns out, she was soon to be.

Added almost 2 1/2 years after my original review: Please disregard the 1 out of 14 helpful rating of my review (as of 8/30/23). This is simply a case of thirteen people who liked this movie not liking that I didn't. The merits of my review were meaningless to them. It is this immature "I will automatically be critical of someone's opinion that differs from my own" or, in this case, "I will find a review "unhelpful" because the opinions expressed differ from mine" that is at the heart of much of the strife that has and always will be a part of existence on the earthly plane. Learning from different viewpoints is at the heart of personal growth, and a sign of wisdom.

The thirteen people should be ashamed of themselves, but, sadly, won't be. And for the one "helpful" voter, congratulations. You get it.

Added later: I see four more tools have weighed in.

Added even later: One more tool has weighed in-and one perceptive reader. The few perceptive souls in this rather clueless world always bolster my spirits when I am feeling down, as I tend to be when watching pig 🐖 swill such as this. Two out of twenty (as of Apr 13, 2024)? Yes, that ratio is about right.
2 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Office (2005–2013)
10/10
Umwolvs99 WAS Right
9 November 2006
The first season of the American version of "The Office" suffered in comparison to the British one because the scripts were practically identical and the original had hit the right note in a way that couldn't be bettered. It didn't help matters for me that I had just purchased the BBC version on DVD and had watched them all over the weekend immediately before the American version debuted. I don't care how well it had been done, it wouldn't have worked for me because I was essentially watching reruns of the original, the only difference being that the characters were now American. It was bad enough where I was indifferent to whether or not they cancelled the show after that first season.

In the second season they started airing episodes that were not based on episodes of the original. This made all the difference in the world. Almost immediately it became my favorite sitcom (sitcom almost seems like an insulting name for a show like this). The tone and sensibility remained the same but the new material-since it was new-allowed the show to come into its own. And I accepted it as its own creation and not just an Americanization of a British show. The characters were no longer tied to the British ones. They existed in their own right. And since the show didn't rely on the formulaic nature of most other comedy shows (setup-punch line) it was not only more funny (not always laugh-out-loud) but also more believable. It was the kind of comedy that exists in the real world-albeit with some extreme types of people-the kind of comedy that you seldom see on the typical sitcom. It's the kind of humor for people who appreciate the absurdity that is usually a part of life. Better to laugh than to cry at it. And, as far as TV shows are concerned, better to allow for some ambiguity in the humor than to always make it hit-you-over-the-head obvious, which, just in case anyone didn't get it, is punctuated by a laugh track.

I still think the British version is the better version (it is the closest thing to a perfect sitcom that there is) and David Brent is in a league of his own, but the American version is a classic in its own right.
13 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Breathless (1960)
8/10
Style Over Content (The style alone accounts for my high rating)
23 October 2006
"Breathless", as the majority of my readers know, is considered the film that put the "New Wave" cinematic movement on the map. Its strength is the casual way in which it is presented. Whereas most movies give the viewer the impression of watching a movie, "Breathless" appears to be a direct glimpse at life itself. The continuously roving camera and the unusual camera angles create a sense of freedom seldom encountered in the movies.

"Breathless" demonstrates the auteur method of film-making, in which the director is really the star of the picture. The manner in which the film is shot is as noticeable and integral to the final product as the actors and the plot are.

Unconventionality is what makes "Breathless" distinctive and allows a movie with a sparse plot and a detached treatment of its characters to work as an unusual and ultimately satisfying viewing experience. Intellectual satisfaction.

I appreciated "Breathless"'s technical innovation and creativity but I didn't ever feel a connection with the two main characters so I would not call "Breathless" a complete success. It was long on style and short on substance. A movie that revolves around two characters who are not likable due to callousness and shallowness is courting disaster. The movie lacked FEELING.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
History IQ (2000– )
I Miss It
5 September 2005
History IQ was far from a perfect game show, but I miss it, just the same. I used to play along interactively under the name, Thucydides, and I won more than my share of games. It was great! I'd almost always be nervous before the game started and as it continued, my armpits would be literally dripping with sweat, showing how important this game was to me. I managed to fill a large jar with my sweat during the run of this show. I would place the jar under my pits and just let the sweat, which smelled terrible, drip into the jar. I obviously cared a great deal about how I did and would often explode in anger when I missed a question (I still do that sometimes when I'm playing along with Jeopardy at home). I once took my blood pressure right after a game and it was so high that I briefly (very briefly) considered giving up the game. But the siren call of Mark Summers called me back the next day. Anyhoo, the questions weren't as good as they could have been, but the mere existence of a game show that asked questions about history was welcome to me. I know that this post has been more about my reaction to the show than the show itself. That's probably because I'm an egoist. I figure anyone who wound up here has already seen the show, anyway.

Added later: I think it's funny that two people gave my review an "Unhelpful" rating. At least I bothered to write something about the show. No one else has.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Barnaby Jones (1973–1980)
I Loved the Feel of this Show
14 August 2005
I remember watching this show as a kid and finding it immensely enjoyable. I watched it in reruns during summer afternoons (cue nostalgic music), though I can't recall the exact years that I caught it. Probably the early 80s. I was young enough where the formulaic nature of the show that has been mentioned in other reviews here didn't taint the show in any way for me. I didn't watch the show religiously and it has been a long time since I saw any episodes, but the thing that sticks with me about it is the casual, laid-back atmosphere, the cast's charm-particularly Buddy Ebsen's-and, yes, Barnaby regularly running down much younger men on foot. Of course, my memory could be playing tricks on me. I just watched a movie, "Coach", with Cathy Lee Crosby, that I had watched in the late 70s and found enormously erotic, and I couldn't believe how tame and unerotic (with the exception of one kiss) it was, proving that you can't go home again. If this series is ever released on DVD, I'll probably buy it, hoping that maybe this time I will be able to go home again. My fear is that, having seen so many TV shows and movies since then, the formulaic nature of the show will be more apparent to me, which could make the show get tiresome in a hurry.
26 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Coach (1978)
3/10
Very Sexy Movie(my original title-now more like Very Silly Movie)
2 August 2005
I watched this movie when I was a young lad full of raging hormones and it was about as sexy a movie as I had ever seen-or ever was to see. It may not have been a great movie. My guess is it wasn't. I don't really remember much about it, to tell you the truth. I only remember the sexual chemistry between Crosby and Biehn. No woman in ANY movie has ever done it for me as the unbelievably sexy Cathy did in this movie. I haven't seen it since that first time I caught it on TV in the 70s and I don't think I'd want to see it again since I'm sure it would be a disappointment-my hormones aren't as raging and I've become more jaded over the years. Still, when I think back on the shower scene I can still remember how great it felt way back when.

Added later: After watching the movie again, I discovered that it's dangerous to go home again. What was once erotic is now pretty tame. The older woman-younger man thing still works for me, just not as much as it once did, probably because I'm no longer eleven or twelve. That older woman is now younger than I am (although still quite sexy-Cathy was always the one doing the dangerous things on "That's Incredible"-beautiful, strong woman *sigh*). Also, the amateurishness of the whole thing wasn't perceived by my young mind.

Moral: Sometimes it's better not to revisit the past.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed