Reviews

OK, read the book first. Clearly, mistake number one. Loved it. Looked forward to this movie for months (mistake number two). I loved the posters and the previews (mistake number three - those were the best part of the movie experience).

I'm not clear how you can take subject matter that two-thirds of the teenage English-speaking world, and a good portion of the rest, found riveting, and turn it into dreck, but it happened. I was actually so bored during the "let's run up the tree and share confidences (so confidential we need not involve the audience... we'll just have burgeoning music)" I nearly walked out. I didn't because I had built this thing up for my husband for months, and I refused to admit I didn't like it.

The make-up was dreadful. I expected something like Johnny Depp in Willy Wonka - I got John Waters. The dialog seemed non-existent, and inadequate at best. I liked the actors, but I'm sure I'm showing my age, when I say that I just didn't get why Edward had to have more hair in that odd cut than Wolverine. My husband hadn't read the books, and he didn't feel like there were gaps in the story (actually, he didn't feel there was much of a story) so maybe reading the book didn't make a huge difference...but that's the only reason why I stayed through the whole movie.

I think I'll hang on to my money when the next one comes out. If it's like this one, the original author, and my imagination, will be a lot better than the screen version.

I avoided watching this movie when it hit the premium channels, even though I find Paul Walker to be a competent actor, because I just didn't want to see another family/"call of the wild" movie. Not that those are bad, but you do have to be in the right frame of mind.

And I'm familiar with the story on which it's based - in 1958, the Japanese scientific expedition to the south pole had to leave all 15 of their dogs behind due to weather issues. All but two died, many of them in their chains. (Apparently the two survivors lived off a penguin diet.)

Stuck at home with a migraine and ready for something numbing, with a choice of this or Dr. Phil (people who lack common sense, or the lovely visuals of British Columbia?), I chose Alaskan malamutes & Siberian huskies. And a great choice it was.

Beautiful cinematography. Reasonable acting. Since I thought most of the dogs were doomed, I was ready for the worst (trust Disney to give the dogs cleaner coats, more food, and a palatable ending). I was so charmed by the movie that when it was over I immediately searched the web for Siberian Husky characteristics and puppy prices, but it turns out they don't cohabit well with other animals (like, say, obnoxious Siamese cats. Damn).

Nice family flick with beautiful scenery. There's a lot worse out there.

For once, I thank the film gods above that my husband is so picky about what he's willing to go see in a movie theatre. I sort of vaguely wanted to see this, what with all the buzz about Jessica Simpson and a movie evoking that simple small town life and roots of Nascar. But he wasn't willing to pay money to see this, so I had to wait for Starz.

And I could have happily waited in ignorance thinking "gee, it couldn't be THAT bad" because I found out, after seeing it on Starz, that yes, indeed it could. It was beyond bad. It was wretched. This thing stank worse than fresh dairy cow manure on a hot tar freeway. It was worse than 2004's Catwoman, which I think we can agree was made its own significant tick mark on the international measurement of bad.

Jessica Simpson's exposure was limited largely to her breasts (entire phrase now pun. sorry) and a few spoken lines, for which I am grateful, because she apparently was speaking English phonetically. It's just silly, then, to point out that she didn't seem to relate to any other character in the film and didn't project any dimension to her character other than her own personality. I heard from the trade rags she was great to work with, and as a result she's probably got a rosy near-naked future in films. I hope she's working on those acting lessons.

Unfortunately, we saw plenty of Johnny Knoxville and Seann William Scott. Far more than I wanted to, since their Duke boys were obnoxious, grubby, and astonishingly stupid. Maybe there was supposed to be some sort of animal magnetism going on there, but the only animal I was reminded of was the P*I*G pig. I'm having a hard time picturing any sorority girl falling for a Duke unless she was seriously drunk, camping in the backwoods, headed to a bush for a quick vomit, and one of them was lying in her path. In fact, I fail to understand why everyone was chasing the Dukes, when they were so thoroughly unwashed, lacking in charisma of any kind, and undesirable. Let them drink their moonshine and barf on themselves; it's obvious that's what they enjoy doing in their spare time.

When I think what Owen Wilson and Luke Wilson (I'm sure they couldn't stay far enough away) could have done with the roles, it's just sad. Britney Spears should be relieved. Maybe if she had played Daisy, the director would have been able to make up his mind as to whether this was supposed to be a parody of, or true to, the original series.

I gather Michael Roof was supposed to add some odd backwoods country idiot savant perspective in a tobacco-chewing, wart-picking crazy sort of way (if only his spitting sound was aligned with his spitting motion). My hometown lacked a Dil - if we had one, we'd arrest him - so I found his underwear-clad shooting of armadillos a bit repulsive, and the scene where the Dukes leave sorority girls with him downright creepy. I'm not sure why they weren't totin' guns - you'd think, as true country girls, they would have been packing, er, packin'.

I shouldn't have been surprised, with Willie Nelson in the mix, to see so many doors opening with unnamed clouds of smoke (wink, wink). I supposed that a little "medicinal weed," along with unpaved roads, no clothes dryers, the HeeHaw Honeys ("now in college!"), general stupidity of residents, and the unwashed masses in the bar, is what Hollywood supposes is part of country livin'. Hazzard County went so far backwards in time with this movie, I'm surprised they didn't have an ex-slave or two share cropping. The Dukes of Hazzard series was occasionally stupid - this was offensive.

It must have been the camaraderie on the set that made Burt Reynolds stick with this one. At least Burt (by playing a cartoon character), along with Michael Weston and the basset hound, stuck to the original characterizations from the series. In this derivative / parody / remake / whatever.

And, of the entire cast and film, the only actor I found interesting and charismatic was that basset hound. Although one dimensional, he played his part to perfection. Think what he could have done with a few lines.

Once again lying on the couch with a migraine, I decide this was the film to watch instead of that 1960's poorly filmed mishmash of "a funny thing happened to me on the way..." on TCM. I'm not sure which would have been easier on my headache.

Having recently worked for a high tech company, here in enlightened Silicon Valley, where the salesmen take down the nude pictures only if you suggest that a customer might be offended, I found the film moving, gripping, and very believable. I've also heard a female manager - in the past year - respond during personnel harassment training that "women just have no sense of humour anymore." So I found the conflicted feelings of the women involved understandable. The topic of the film was quite contemporary for me.

Had it not been, this would seriously reek of the Lifetype victim channel. We don't usually get to see actors of this caliber unless they're just starting out (poor Charlize just has to get herself all grimy to get taken seriously, and it is working - her talent is starting to glow through that mullet) on the movie of the week, or have such high production values (nice mine equipment), but this is the type of topic ("I married my rapist," "My lover died, leaving me with nothing" "my husband stalked me" "I was harassed at the office"....) on which that channel thrives.

And the story, as told, had some issues. Dad making that speech in front of the union - and the members suddenly turn supportive. That's real life for you. That handy moment when Woody Harrelson, in spite of the judge and opposing counsel, browbeats the truth out of Jeremy Renner's character. Handy way to tie up THAT important loose end quickly. Apparently it was all that we were going to see tied up, because we didn't get to see the victory (dance) or settlement.

And I'm not sure I feel that great about the "more importantly," preachy note at the tail end of the movie. Did every plaintiff in the class action feel they didn't need nice punitive damages and instead wanted the symbolic victory of a documented harassment policy? Some of those plaintiffs looked like they hadn't had a square meal in some time, and they had certainly put up with enough threats and downright attacks to earn some retribution.

So I didn't find the movie satisfying or completely on target. I did find it interesting and believable. And maybe I'll see it again on Lifetime soon.

So, back when Herbie made his first appearance, I was perfectly happy watching Dean Jones mug away. I only wanted to be entertained for a few hours and eat overly buttered popcorn. Now, unfortunately, I have expectations of a riveting/delightful story whenever I watch a movie, if I'm not on some sort of medication. And this is another good movie for the medicated. There are no major laughs, no complex plot lines, no difficult twists. Herbie Fully Loaded is great for the fully loaded.

This was the first time I had seen La Lohan on the screen since she swapped places with Jamie Lee Curtis (I thought she was excellent in that), and I can't say I was terribly impressed this time around. Aside from her constantly changing and distractingly unnatural hair color, she just didn't ring true as the kid next door who had spent a lifetime hanging around road racers. Her 'need for speed' wasn't portrayed consistently in the film - perhaps it was elsewhere - she looked older than her part, and seemed to always be looking for something (a party? designer togs? new place to spend money?) off set. I couldn't see any chemistry with Justin Long; that romance seemed obligatory at best. The only time Lindsay appeared engaged was when she was interacting with Matt Dillon, who I thought was appropriately over the top as Evil Bad Guy Trip Murphy.

It was great to see Herbie again, and I loved the movie intro with material from the old movies. If Disney had popped out with some Car 53 jewelry, I might have worn some just to be loyal. His new feature (?) was a little inconsistent (does he channel the thoughts of his driver? Does he now skateboard?) but whatever. We all knew how it was going to end, but I do wish he had ended up with someone a little less dopey than Maggie. And my head still hurts from that lesson Maggie and we viewers had hammered home.

What would have made the movie worthwhile? Have the old Herbie in a real story with a real plot - at the very least, Herbie's as good as Lassie - but clearly that's asking too much. Why is it that Disney always goes back to the same well as "Herbie Goes Bananas" and "the Computer That Wore Tennis Shoes" when it comes to innovation?

I'm sure this was a great movie for kids and those with no expectations. For the rest of us....it's for when you have the 'flu and just can't take the suspense of Rear Window.

Love the idea of comic books coming to the big screen. And loved the original concept of the league of combining literary characters into heroes. Didn't hate this movie, but sure didn't like it.

It started out with such great potential. We see Sean Connery at what I assume to be the Explorers Club in Africa, and he makes so many delightful throwaway comments first when declining to come to the aid of queen and country, then while he disposes of the enemy in his casual English (OK, Scottish) way. The enemy, as usual, has its guns set on "miss Quartermain, hit others." Charming. I'm ready to enjoy what is looking like a nice solid adventure flick.

But there's a foreshadowing of problems to come. With the building being large enough to hold an army division, but the bar itself (which one presumes, in that heat, would be the most important room) only the size of a third of that, what on earth was in the rest of the building? Dorm rooms? OK, I'll overlook that background issue, because so far the movie has been quite entertaining, thanks to Sean's character.

We go to London, where the invisible man shtick is a little annoying, especially since his make-up constantly changes (normally, I don't catch continuity issues, but this is ridiculous) - perhaps this will end soon. Then Tom Sawyer shows up. Don't need him, don't like him, find Shane West to be (sorry) a less than able actor here. Find him completely distracting from the story, since he was a boy in the Mark Twain stories and suddenly he's a "romantic" young man. I left him back whitewashing Aunt Polly's fence, so his character just doesn't work for me, always trotting about saying something in a lame way. They would have been better off if they used Shane West's namesake.

We see the submarine, and encounter some serious perspective issues there. Were we thinking it needed to be the size of Manhatten? How many rooms? Was it crewed by millions, or was it as narrow as a #2 pencil? Good grief.

Then Venice. Talk about dark, convoluted, and pointless. Is M going to blame some other country to bring the world closer to war? (Sorry, but once I latch on to the plot, I expect the movie to follow it with me.) OK, yes, after everyone ran through Venice like a bunch of chickens/bats with their heads cut off, Venice still exists, but I saw a lot of buildings fall down, so I'd say it's a tie between M and the league whether one succeeded over the other. Except there is a cornucopia of delight for some special effects team. It's just an endless pile of boulders and buildings flying for me as I wait (forever) for the story to pick up and move on.

And while I'm on the subject of the story: I realize that reading the LEG comics is not a pastime, it's a commitment, but the movie plot is just impractical. I could handle that M is really the bad guy (well documented from prior experience in comics), and that Dorian is on the wrong side (urbanity often leads you astray). But M isn't interesting enough as a character for me to really care about that whole blood collecting thing - I found him rather dull as villains go. (Except to wonder where his beard/hair went since only the mask was lying around on tables. Again: continuity!)

Then we're off to the frozen wasteland. As before, the scenery and backdrops are excellent - clearly no expense is spared. And the Arctic wear that just pops out of nowhere (apparently a full costume staff is available on board the enormous nautilus - starting to appreciate the extra rooms) are lovely. But now we're just going slap-happy with criminal minions (are armies of bad guys who look alike available at every corner? Is that who was using the extra Nautilus space?) and battles that seem to take place in every room ("miss main characters, hit bad guys and disposable nautilus crew").

Sean is great (I think if he was reading cook books aloud, I would be happy); Stuart Townsend and Peta Wilson are good, but much of the cast seem to be just flopping about like pale fish on land. Maybe the make-up makes it hard to breathe? I realize it's hard to find actors willing to put up with a lot of make-up and special effects, but I had higher hopes that a movie with Connery would be more palatable.

Speaking of the special effects, it's starting to be a treat to see real people fight like real people. I understand that Mina had special skills, and I'm fine with that. But I don't think Dorian Grey's clothing regenerated like his painting - after all, he does have to change his underwear (who does his cleaning?). And all that rifle stuff - was every character aiming to miss, or were we as competent at shooting rifles as we were at shooting the movie?

I would have been OK with this if the producers were trying to get started with a series, and work the kinks out. But killing off Quartermain, played by the only actor with any serious abilities, was the death knell. The concept for this movie had a lot of potential, but it just wasn't carried out.

Here's another one for my secondary category of movies: the movies you watch when you just had your teeth drilled so you can't laugh out loud or think too hard because of the Tylenol with codeine the dentist thankfully prescribed. Wait; even then, this movie would be stupid.

OK, credit to the writers taking the flip side to the nerd-in-the-new-school story. Lindsay Lohen, apparently applying herself to this one, manages to play the drama queen with flair, if not gusto (perhaps offering some insight into her personal psyche). Glenne Headly, who I'm ashamed to say I haven't noticed since Disney's overblown Dick Tracy, did a great job as the long-suffering, seen-it-all, mom, perfect for the movie. Allison Pill was great as Ella, although I'm not sure the character she played would have ever really stood up to Lola, regardless of circumstances. It was good to see Carol Kane on the screen - and Adam Garcia; up until HBO, I'm not sure we saw enough of him.

But even the cast members can't save this movie. The scenario is so very unlikely. Silly self-centered new girl changes name at school (really, how many high school teachers would cater to that whim?) and creates rivalry with reigning popular queen (like any new girl takes that first step. Even the biggest idiot on the planet professes undying love and Best Friends Forever with the most popular girl in school to get into the best parties). Meanwhile, artistic mommy continues to remain true to herself, selling enough pottery so each child can have a room in their home in the 'burbs (the suburbs are just riotous with successful potters). Daddy is a famous dog cartoonist, but apparently pays no alimony. Daughter pretends Daddy is dead instead of using Daddy's famous standing to gain in popularity (right, as if the normal new-to-town girl wouldn't be flashing the dog on day two).

Then, rock band leader meets silly spoiled girl (like that's going to happen) at the band's party (ditto) and, after a 15-minute drunken conversation, is persuaded to give up alcohol forever instead of swearing off teenage girls forever (the natural impulse after this movie). Current snobbish popularity queen is put in her place forever (OK, news flash: that NEVER happens in real life. Only with a great deal of luck will you see her at the 25-year reunion and hear that she has divorced the football quarterback and been stuck living with her parents in your backwater home town. Usually she's become a fitness instructor to the stars and is engaged to a fabulously wealthy stunt man while you've spent 10 years trying to get rid of stubborn belly fat) and our heroine is benevolent forever (she was a bit mercurial before, but I'm sure she'll have real focus now) from her new throne.

I thankfully watched this on one of the premium channels, so when the girls misplaced their tickets for The Concert, I could at least change the channel rather than endure their amazing stupidity further. If my nieces behaved this way, I would have to send them to a remedial school for elementary purse carrying.

Maybe this movie was great for teenage girls, but I found it to be silly set to a good soundtrack. (Just goes to show how close you can come to saving a really crummy flick with good music. John Belushi was right.) It was the soundtrack that kept me watching, not the acting or the storyline - the story was just embarrassing.

This showed up on the history channel and with the husband once again off playing poker I thought, OK, time to ingest a little more history. Only to end up retching over yet another Nicholas Cage bad movie.

Now, I just recently saw Con Air for the first time on STARz, so the juxtaposition is unfortunate for his rating, but is he letting his lizard tattoo or Elvis visitations determine his movie selections? Are the script readings done by a psychic? Does he gravitate to stupid characters?

I thought I was going to see something that was about World War II, but actually I got to see a silly film filled with characters I've seen so often I could have written this script myself during a silicon valley traffic jam, and done a much better and far more historically accurate job. They all trotted around after the usual conflicted Sergeant - or is Nicolas Cage always conflicted (see fixations above)? - with a Navajo Indian (instead of a representative of some other ethnic group) thrown in to cause racial tension.

Let's see, we had the bullying racist, who then has his life saved by an Indian (gee, there's a surprise), the panicking recruit who can't take the pressure and trips the mine field (wow, didn't see that coming), the accepting comrade who (symbolically) blends an harmonica with the Indian's flute (but dies saving the Indian's life, ditto, ditto), the young boy who must grow up too soon (ah, the poignancy), the Army lieutenant that treats everyone like tools (not again!), the mystic wisdom that teaches us all a little something, the constantly breathy flute music (used with all cultural lessons) - have we endured this one before?

Not really, because we've never seen quite so many battles, with so many bodies (tossed so high in the air) before, or filmed in Utah while pretending to be Iwo Jima. Was John Woo trying to win some kind of battle-filming contest here? Well, I hope so, because he sure lost a battle with the script.

Of course, we had the added stress for poor battle-worn Nicolas Cage that he might have to shoot his code talker rather than have him fall into enemy hands. Quite the sophisticated plot twist, that! Oh no, will Nicolas get too close and feel bad if he has to shoot his young trustee? More conflict! More angst! Cage's specialty! Makes the story so much better, right?

Better, but not accurate. Reality: the code wasn't the language - it was a derivative, based on, the Navajo language. If someone was captured, the code would be changed. The prisoner might understand the base language, but not the code itself.

Oh, yeah, periodically the Indians, who I believe were the original inspiration for the movie, would get to talk back and forth in Navajo, and we would get to see the translation on the screen. They would say their position (not in actual code). Oh, and one time in the movie, the Japanese noticed the Americans weren't speaking English.

And another time, according to the movie, the Japanese attempted to capture an Indian who was just standing around the front line because somehow they knew he was a code talker. Right. They guessed in the middle of combat that he wasn't Hawaiian or Japanese American, he was an American Indian. And they also had somehow figured out that the language that wasn't English was a derivative of an American Indian dialect, and therefore this man must be a Code Talker. Right there in the middle of the battle. Alrighty then. (It must be similar wisdom that causes me to doubt the veracity of this incident.)

These incidents brought history alive for me, alright.

Reality: Code talkers were translating messages NON STOP throughout the taking of Iwo Jima. Which makes it difficult to understand how the Navajos would have been hacking and shooting away on the battlefield, or standing around the front lines, and going through that growing-up-too-soon stuff. Reality: They were able to communicate three times faster than previous codes had hustled along, but like any other job, the number of messages increased to fill the time available. Seems to be a bit of a discrepancy between busy busy real code talker life and Hollywood. Oh, sorry. That's a duh.

In addition to not understanding the difference between a language and a code (is this rocket science?) the soldiers in the film didn't even wear the right dog tags. Reality: I've got my dad's dog tags from WWII, and you can get a lovely facsimile at the Smithsonian gift store right now. Were they not stylish enough? Was it more exciting to use choke chain dog tags? Every time I saw a soldier I saw an anachronism. As in big fat mistake.

I do appreciate that at least we have a movie in these Politically Correct days where we had two sides to a war: good guys and bad guys. You don't see that very often any more, so points to John Woo for that one area.

But I'm getting away from what was really going on in the movie, which was all about battered, bruised, benighted and badgered Nicholas Cage, who talked to the Navajo like Clint Eastwood talked to the trees in Paint Your Wagon. Not to mention the usual angst-ridden and conflicted stuff he faces. I got very little wind talking, and an awful lot of wind blowing out of this movie.

All it did for the important role the Navajo (and Comanche in the European Theatre) Indians played during WWII was bring them up in conversation - too many inaccuracies to be of any other use.